"^y. V-^' 



.••^ 



c^ ^^^. 






.■^ 



•^r 



S » « / 



' /- 



1 1 ^ V 





















,^% 






•V, -^ •>' \ 



Co ., 


















'^y- v^ 



o 






'X' 



^ ,^ 












\' 



1 1^ 







V 







' , X * .A 'O^ 









oA' 



^^ -^ 










« 0-. 



o:^ 



* a N ^ P)^ 






%%^ 




•^ 

.'\'!%"<^. 











■''c^. 



%:■ 



)C.a 




DANIEL OCONNELL. 



LIFE 

AND SPEECHES 

Off 

DANIEL b'CONNELL, M.P 

(ILLUSTRATED.) 
INCLTIDINd 

MANY SPEECHES NOl IN OTHER COLLECTIONS, 



n^^:^ 



,;X/VVV\AAA/N/NAA/\/V\/V\/VVWAAA/WW>A/VWW 



\ 



J. A. McGEE, PUBLISHER, 

7 Babclay Street. 

1872. 



> 



y'y 







V 



V 

.\^^ 



THE UBRAIYJ 

OF CONGRESS I 

LWASHM>QTOlf| 

Entered according to act of Congress in the year 1872, by 

J. A. McGEE, 
la the office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington. 



a-3i5>6f 



t" 



9 



OOI^TEITTS. 



DANIEL O'CONNELL, M. P.: 

Memoir of Mr. Connell 11 

Speech at Limerick, 1812 13 

/Eeply to Mr. Bellew, in the Catholic Board, 1813 26 

/ On requiring gecurities from the Catholics, 1813 38 

Speech in Defence of John Magee, July 27, 1813 54 

1/ Speech in the British Catholic Association, on the defeat of the 

Emancipation Bill, May 26, 1825 122 

On the Treaty of Limerick, 1826 140 

^" Speech at the Bar of the House of Commons to maintain his Bight 

to sit as member for Clare 152 

Speech at the second Clare Election 165 

On the Coercion BUI. (House of Commons, February 19, 1833). ... 172 

Speech at Mullaghmast Monster Meeting, September, 1843 182 

Speech in his own Defence, at the L-ish State Trials, 1844, in the 
Court of Queen's Bench, in Lrelandj in the case of the Queen 
vs. Daniel O'Connell and others 192 

I 



SKETCH OF DANIEL O'CONNELL, M. P. 



Daniel O'Connell, acknowledged leader of tlie Irish nation for 
the most important period of the nineteenth century, was born at 
a place called Carhan, beside the small post-town of Cahirciveen, 
near the harbor of Valentia, on the coast of Kerry, in 1775. 

After a preliminary course at a school near Cove, he was sent to 
the Continent, and was successively at Louvain, St. Omer and 
Douai, tni the French Kevolution compelled his return. One of 
the effects of the European convulsion was a relaxation of bigotry 
in 1792, so as to permit Catholics to become barristers. Seizing 
the opportunity, O'Connell, in 1794, entered himself at the Middle 
Temple, and was called to the bar in the memorable year when his 
country made her last fearful effort to free herself from the galling 
yoke of centuries. 

It was not the moment for a young untried lawyer to enter the 
field of pubHc affairs ; but when, in 1800, the so-calle d Union, but 
real provincialization of Ireland was proposed, O'Connell made his 
first appearance as a public speal;er, and organized a meeting of 
CathoUcs, which, with the brutal Major Sirr and his blood-stained 
soldiery in arms around them, passed bold and intrepid resolutions, 
denouncing that iniquity, which it became henceforward his pur- 
pose through life to attempt to undo. That he failed to induce 
English statesmen and the English parliament to forego the advan- 
tage gained by a system of terror, fraud, and bribery, is a matter 
of history. Believing England honest, and ready to do what hon- 
esty required, he devoted his Hfe to agitation for the Eepeal of the 
Union. One great point he gained — Cathohc Emancipation, — and 
much that England has since yielded is a result of his labors. 

O'Connell as a barrister, was from the outset remarkably success- 
ful, and rose to a practice of the utmost extent. He rose above 
partisanship in Irish factions, and for all Irishmen, without distinc- 



10 MEMOIE OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

tion of creed or blood, claimed equal privileges. A recent English 
estimate of O'Connell justly says : 

" His style as a pleader was the best perhaps ever known at the Irish 
bar. Others have been more poHshed, more elegant, more richly meta- 
phorical ; but for clear force, for adroit invention, for Demosthenic terse- 
ness, concentrating and controlling Irish fervor, for the impetuous hail- 
storm of words beating down resistance, we doubt whether any speaker 
of a nation justly famed for eloquence has been the master of O'Connell. 
Anecdotes without number are told of his skill with witnesses, of his au- 
dacity with judges, of the nimble turns and unsurmised devices by which 
he snatched verdicts for his cKents, and his success as an orator was not 
confined to the bar." 

As an orator of the people, addressing vast crowds of his coun- 
trymen in the densely packed hall or under the canopy of heaven, 
•where, inspired by the landscape of his native land, he poured 
forth his torrents of eloquence ; gathering a whole nation under 
his control, he has no equal in history. For more than twenty 
years before Catholic Emancipation the burden of the cause was, 
he justly says, thrown upon him. For more than twenty years, 
there was not a day, of which part was not devoted to working out 
the CathoHc cause. He aroused the torpid, sustained the faint- 
hearted, restrained the impulsive, conciliated the great, and in less 
than eight years, by a system of agitation peculiarly his o\nti, 
without deviating a hair's breadth from the principles of peace and 
loyalty, which he always maintained, he saw the gates of the con- 
stitution flung open to the long oppressed Catholics. 

Then the great CathoHc lawyer, the great agitator and popular 
speaker, entered the parliament of the United Kingdom. He soon 
trampled over the fear, coldness and distrust with which he was 
at first received ; and no speaker was heard with more marked 
attention. EQs bold step in standing for Clare ; his speech at the 
bar of the House, made his name known throughout the world. 
From May, 1829, when he took his seat as Member for Clare, till 
his death, he continued in parhament, representing Ken-y, Dublin 
and Cork at different periods. 

In 1834, he began the Repeal agitation, by moving in parhament 
for a repeal of the Legislative Union, effected in 1800 by such vio- 
lence and fraud. The only answer made in the House was the 
silly one of Peel, "We will not consent to dismember the British 
empire," as though it had been dismembered before the Union. 



MEMOIR OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 11 

The agitation in Ireland again drew him to his great field, the 
addresses to the people. Honored almost as a sovereign, invested 
■with every dignity in their power, he led on the movement, calling 
meetings of hundreds of thousands, till the government, in alarm, 
in October, 1843, forbade by proclamation the monster meeting at 
Clontarf. 

O'Connell was then arrested with others, on a charge of con- 
spiracy. The old system began, a packed jury, venal judges, 
hired informers, and a verdict was obtained, which the House of 
Lords, with some sense of justice, set aside as a mockery, a delu- 
sion, and a snare. 

Mr. O'Connell's great work was however checked. He had tried 
to convince his countrymen that agitation, the legal and peaceful 
presenting of their grievances, would ultimately obtain justice. 
The government taught the Irish people that this was a delusion ; 
that no sense of justice would ever induce them to yield ; that con- 
cessions to Ireland were to be extorted only from their fears. 
O'Connell's pretended conspiracy was a hint to organize a real one. 

Declining health indeed withdrew O'Connell from public life ; 
his former career was but feebly resumed, and setting out in 1847 
on a pilgrimage to Eome, he died at Genoa, on the 15th of May. 
His heart was borne to the Eternal City, while his body was con- 
veyed back to the island he loved so welL 



/ 



SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'COMELL, M. P. 



SPEECH AT LIMEEICK, 1812. 



I FEEL it mj duty, as a professed agitator, to address tlie 
meeting. It is merely in the exercise of my office of agitation, 
tliat I think it necessary to say a few words. For any pur- 
pose of illustration or argument, further discourse is useless : 
all the topics which the present period suggested, have been 
treated of with sound judgment, and a rare feHcity of diction, 
by my respected and talented friend (Mr. Boche) ; all I shall 
do is, to add a few observations to what has fallen from that 
g^itleman ; and whilst I sincerely admire the happy style in 
which he has treated those subjects, I feel deep regret at being 
unable to imitate his excellent discourse. 

And, first, let me concur with him in congratulating the 
CathoHcs of Limerick on the progi'ess our great cause has 
made since we were last assembled. Since that period our 
cause has not rested for support on the efforts of those alone 
who were immediately interested ; no, our Protestant brethren 
throughout the land have added their zealous exertions for our 
emancipation. They have, with admirable patriotism, evinced 
their desire to conciliate by serving us, and I am sure I do but 
justice to the Catholics, when I proclaim our gratitude, as 
written on our hearts, and to be extinguished only with our 
lives. 

Nor has the support and the zeal of our Protestant brethren 
been vain, and barren. No, it has been productive of great 



14 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

and solid advantages ; it has procured, for the cause of reli- 
gious hberty, the respect even of the most bigoted of our op- 
ponents ; it has struck down English prejudice ; it has con- 
vinced the mistaken honest ; it has terrified the hypocritical 
knaves ; and finally, it has pronounced for us, by a great and 
triumphant majority, from one of the branches of the legisla- 
ture, the distinct recognition of the propriety and the necessity 
of conceding justice to the great body of the Irish people. 

Let us, therefore, rejoice in our mutual success ; let us re- 
joice in the near approach of freedom ; let us rejoice in the 
prospect of soon shaking off our chains, and of the speedy ex- 
tinction of oiu' grievances. But above all, let us rejoice at the 
means by which these happy effects have been produced ; let 
us doubly rejoice, because they afford no triumph to any part 
of the Irish nation over the other — that they are not the re- 
sult of any contention among ourselves ; but constitute a vic- 
tory, obtained for the Catholics by the Protestants — that they 
prove the liberahty of the one, and require the eternal grati- 
tude of the other — that they prove and promise the eternal 
dissolution of ancient animosities and domestic feuds, and af- 
ford to every Christian and to every patriot, the cheering cer- 
tainty of seeing peace, harmony, and benevolence prevail in 
that country, where a wicked and perverted policy has so long 
and so fatally propagated and encouraged dissension, discord, 
and rancor. 

"We owe it to the hberality of the Irish Protestants — to the 
zeal of the Irish Presbyterians — to the friendly exertion of the 
Irish Quakers ; we owe, to the cordial re-union of every sect 
and denomination of Irish Christians, the progress of our cause. 
They have procured for us the solemn and distinct promise 
and pledge of the House of Commons — they almost obtained 
for us a similar declaration from the House of Lords. It was 
lost by the petty majority of one — it was lost by a majority, not 
of those who hstened to the absurd prosings of Lord Eldon, 
to the bigoted and turbid declamation of that Enghsh Chief 
Justice, whose sentiments so forcibly recall the memory of the 
star-chamber ; not of those who were able to compare the va- 
pid or violent folly of the one party, with the statesman- 
like sentiments, the profound arguments, the splendid elo- 



SPEECH AT LIMERICK. 15 

quence of the Marquis Wellesley. Not of those who heard 
the reasonings of our other illustrious advocates ; but by 
a majority of men who acted upon preconceived opinions, or, 
from a distance, carried into effect their bigotry, or, perhaps, 
worse propensities — who availed themselves of that absurd 
privilege of the peerage, which enables those to decide who 
have not heard — ^which permits men to pronounce upon sub- 
jects they have not discussed — and allows a final determina- 
tion to precede argument. 

It was not, however, to this privilege alone, that our want 
of success was to be attributed. The very principle upon 
which the present administration has been formed, was brought 
into immediate action, and with success ; for, in the latter 
periods of the present reign, every administration has had a 
distinct principle upon which it was formed, and which serves 
the historian to explain all its movements. Thus, the princi- 
ple of the Pitt administration was — to deprive the people of all 
share in the government, and to vest all power and authority 
in the crown. In short, Pitt's views amounted to unqualified 
despotism. This gxeat object he steadily pursued through his 
ill-starred career. It is true he encouraged commerce, but it 
was for the purposes of taxation ; and he used taxation for 
the purposes of corruption ; he assisted the merchants, as long 
as he could, to grow rich, and they lauded him ; he bought 
the people with their own money, and they praised him. Each 
succeeding day produced some new inroad on the constitu- 
tion ; and the alarm which he excited, by reason of the bloody 
workings of the French revolution, enabled him to rule the 
land with uncontrolled sway ; he had bequeathed to his suc- 
cessor the accumulated power of the crown — a power which 
must be great, if it can sustain the nonentities of the present 
administration. 

The principle of Pitt's administration was despotism — the 
principle of Perceval's administration was peculating bigotry — 
bigoted peculation ! In the name of the Lord he plundered 
the people. Pious and enhghtened statesman ! he would tako 
their money only for the good of their souls. 

The principle of the present administration is still more ob- 
vious. It has unequivocally disclosed itself in all its move- 



16 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

ments — ^it is simple and single — it consists in falsehood. False- 
hood is the bond and linl? that connects this ministry in office. 
Some of them pretend to be our friends — you know it is not 
true — they are only our worse enemies for the hypocrisy. 
They declare that the Catholic question is no longer opposed 
by the cabinet — that it is left to the discretion of each indi- 
vidual retainer. The fact is otherwise — and their retainers, 
though not commanded, as formerly, are carefully advised to 
vote against us. 

The minister, Lord Castlereagh, is reported to have said in. 
the House of Commons, that in the year 1797 and 1798, there 
was no torture in Ireland, to the knowledge of government ! Is 
it really possible that such an assertion was used ? You hear 
of it with astonishment. AU Ireland must shudder, that any 
man could be found thus to assert. Good God ! of what mate- 
rials must that man be made who could say so ? I restrain my 
indignation — I withhold all expressions of surprise — the simple 
statement that such an assertion was used, exceeds, in reply, the 
strongest language of reprobation. But there is no man so stu- 
pid as not to recognize the principle which I have so justly at- 
tributed to this administration. 

What ! No torture ! Great God ! No torture ! Withm the 
walls of your city was there no tortm^e ? Could not Colonel 
Verekerhave informed Lord Castlereagh, that the lash resound- 
ed in the streets even of Limerick, and that the human groan as- 
sailed the wearied ear of humanity ? Yet I am ready to give 
the gallant colonel every credit he deserves ; and, therefore, 
I recall to your grateful recollection the day when he 
risked his hfe to punish one of the instruments of torture. 
Colonel Vereker can tell whether it be not true, that in the 
streets of your city, the servant of his relation, Mrs. Rosslewen, 
was not tortured — whether he was not tortured first, for the 
crime of having expressed a single sentiment of compassion, 
and next because Colonel Vereker interfered for him. 

But there is an additional fact which is not so generally known, 
which, perhaps, Colonel Vereker himself does not know, and 
which I have learned from a highly respectable clergyman, 
that this sad victim of the system of torture, which Lord 
Castlereagh denied, was, at the time he was scourged, in an in- 



SPEECH AT LIMERICK. 17 

firm state of health. — that the flogging inflicted on him deprived 
him of all understanding, and that within a few months he 
died insane, and without having recovered a shadow of reason. 

But why, out of the myriads of victims, do I select a solitary 
instance ? Because he was a native of your city, and liis only 
offence an expression of compassion. I might tell you, did you 
not already know it, that in DubHn there were, for weeks, three 
permanent triangles, constantly supphed with the victims of a 
promiscuous choice made by the army, the yeomanry, the police 
constables, and the Orange lodges ; that the shrieks of the tor- 
tured must have literally resounded in the state apartments of 
the Castle ; and that along by the gate of the Castle yard, a hu- 
man being, naked, tarred, feathered, with one ear cut off, and 
the blood streaming from his lacerated oack, has been hunted 
by a troop of barbarians ! 

"Why do I disgust you with these horrible recollections ? You 
want not the proof of the principle of delusion on which the pre- 
sent administration exists. In your own affairs you have abun- 
dant evidence of it. The fact is, that the proxies in the Lords 
would never have produced a majority even of one against Lord 
Wellesley's motion, but for the exertion of the vital principle of 
the administration. The ministry got the majority of one. The 
pious Lord Eldon, with all his conscience and his calculations, 
and that immaculate distributor of criminal justice, Lord Ellen- 
borough, were in a majority of one. By what holy means think 
you ? Why, by the aid of that wliich cannot be described in 
dignified language — by the aid of a lie — a false, positive, pal- 
pable lie ! 

This manoeuvre was resorted to — a scheme worthy of its 
authors — they had perceived the effects of the manly and dig- 
nified resolutions of the 18th of June. These resolutions had 
actually terrified our enemies, whilst they cheered those noble 
and illustrious friends who had preferred the wishes and wants 
of the people of Ireland to the gratification of paltry and dis- 
graceful minions. The manoeuvre — the scheme, was calcu- 
lated to get rid of the effect of those resolutions, nay, to turn 
their force against us, and thus was the pious fraud effected. 

There is, you have heard, a newspaper, in the permanent pay 
of peculation and corruption, printed in London, under the 



18 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

name of the Courier, a paper worthy the meridian of Constan- 
tinople, at its highest tide of despotism. This paper was di- 
rected to assert the receipt of a letter from Dublin, from 
excellent authority, declaring, I know not how many peers, 
sons of peers, and baronets had retracted the resolutions of 
ihe 18th of June ; that those resolutions were carried by sur- 
prise, and that they had been actually rescinded at a subse- 
quent meeting. 

Never did human baseness invent a more gross untruth; 
never did a more unfounded lie fall from the father of false- 
hood ; never did human turpitude submit to become the vehicle 
of so "glaring" a dereliction fi'om truth. But the Courier 
received its pay, and it was ready to earn the wages of its pros- 
titution. It did so — it published the foul falsehoods with the 
full knowledge of their falsehood ; it pubUshed them in two edi- 
tions, the day before and the day of the debate — at a period 
when inquky was useless — when a contradiction from author- 
ity could not arrive ; at that moment this base trick was played, 
through the intervention of that newspaper, upon the British 
pubhc ! 

Will that public go too far when they charge this impure 
stratagem on those whose purposes it served ? Why, even in 
this country, the administration deems it necessary to give, for 
the support of one miserable paper, two places — one of five, 
and the other of eight hundred a year — the stamp duty remit- 
ted — the proclamations paid for as advertisements — and a per- 
manent bonus of one thousand pounds per annum ! If the 
bribe here be so high, what must it be in England, where 
the toil is so much greater ? And, think you, then, that the 
Courier pubhshed, unsanctioned by its paymasters, this useful 
lie? 

I come now to the next stage in the system of delusion ; it 
is that which my friend, Mr. O'Neil, has noticed. He has pow- 
erfully exposed to you the absurdity of crediting the ministe- 
rial newspapers, when they informed you that the member for 
Limerick had stated in the House of Commons, that the com- 
mercial interests of Limerick were opposed to the Catholic 
claims. Sir, for my part, I entirely agree with Mr. O'Neil ; I 
am siu-e Colonel Vereker said no such thing ; lie is a brave 



SPEECH AT LIMEEICK. 19 

man, and, therefore, a man of truth ; he is probably a pleasant 
friend, and he has those manly traits about him, wliich make it 
not unpleasant to oppose him as an enemy ; I hke the candor 
of his character, and our opposition to him should assume the 
same frankness, and openness, and perfect determination. He 
well knows that a great part of the commercial interests of 
Limerick is in the hands of the Catholics — that the Quakers 
of Limerick, who possess almost the residue of trade, are 
friendly to us, and that, with the exception of the " tag, rag, 
and bob-tail" of the corporation, there is not to be found 
amongst the men who ought to be his constituents a single ex- 
ception to hberahty. 

There remains another delusion ; it is the darling deception 
of this ministry — that which has reconciled the toleration of 
Lord Castlereagh with the intolerance of Lord Liverpool ; it is 
that which has sanctified the connection between both, and the 
place-procuring, prayer-mumbhng Wilberforce 3 it consists in 
sanctions and securities. The Catholics may be emancipated, 
say ministers in pubhc, but they must give securities ; by 
securities, say the same ministers in private, to their support- 
ing bigots, we mean nothing definite, but something that shall 
certainly be inconsistent with the Popish rehgion — nothing 
shall be a security which they can possibly concede — and we 
shall deceive them and secure you, whilst we carry the air of 
liberahty and toleration. 

And can there be any honest man deceived by the cant and 
cry for securities ? — is there any man that believes that there 
is safety in oppression, contumely, and insult, and that secu- 
rity is necessary against protection, liberahty and concihation ? 
— does any man really suppose, that there is no danger from 
the continuance of unjust grievance and exasperating intoler- 
ance ; and that security is wanting against the effects of justice 
and perfect toleration ? Who is it that is idiot enough to be- 
lieve, that he is quite safe in dissension, disunion, and animos- 
ity; and wants a protection against harmony, benevolence, and 
charity ? — that in hatred there is safety — ^in affection, ruin ? — 
ihat now, that we are excluded from the constitution, we may 
be loyal — ^but that if we were entrusted, personally, in its 
safety, we shall wish to destroy it ? 



20 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

But tliis is a pitiful delusion : there was, indeed, a time, 
when " sanctions and securities " might have been deemed 
necessary — when the Catliohc was treated as an enemy to man 
and to God — when his property was the prey of legahzed plun- 
der — ^his religion and its sacred ministers, the object of legal- 
ized persecution ! — when, in defiance and contempt of the dic- 
tates of justice, and the faith of treaties — and I attest the ven- 
erable city, in which I stand, that solemn treaties were basely 
violated — the Enghsh faction in the land turned the Protestant 
into an intolerant and murderous bigot, in order that it might, 
in security, plunder that very Protestant, and oppress his and 
our common country ! Poor neglected Ireland ! At that pe- 
riod, securities might be supposed wanting ; the people of Ire- 
land — the Catholic population of Ireland were then as brave 
and as strong, comparatively, as they are at present ; and the 
country then afforded advantages for the desultory warfare of 
a valiant peasantry, which, fortunately, have since been ex- 
ploded by increasing cultivation. 

At the period to which I allude, the Stuart family were still 
in existence ; they possessed a strong claim to the exaggerating 
allegiance and unbending fidehty of the Irish people. Every 
right that hereditary descent could give the royal race of Stu- 
art, they possessed — in private life, too, they were endeared to 
the Irish, because they were, even the worst of them, gentle- 
men. But they had still stronger claims on the sympathy and 
generosity of the Irish : they had been exalted and were fallen 
— they had possessed thrones and kiagdoms, and were then in 
poverty and humiliation. All the enthusiastic sympathies of 
the Irish heart were roused for them — and all the powerful mo- 
tives of personal interest bore, in the same channel, the resto- 
ration of their rights — the triumph of their religion, the resti- 
tution of their ancient inheritances, would then have been the 
certain and immediate consequences of the success of the Stu- 
art family, in their pretensions to the throne. 

At the period to which I allude, the CathoHc clergy were 
bound by no oath of allegiance ; to be a dignitary of the 
Catholic church in Ireland, was a transportable felony — and 
the oath of allegiance was so intermingled v.itli rehgious 
tenets, that no clergyman or layman of the CathoHc persua- 



SPEECH AT LIMEKICK. 21 

< 

sion could possibly take it. At tliat period, the Catholic clergy 
were all educated in foreign countries, under the eye of the 
Pope, and within the inspection of the house of Stuart. 
From fifty-eight colleges and convents, on the Continent, did 
the Catholic clergy repair to meet, for the sake of their God, 
poverty, persecution, contumely, and, not unfrequently, death, 
in their native land. They were often hunted like wild 
beasts, and never could claim any protection from the law ! 
That — that was a period, when securities might well have 
been necessarj' — when sanctions and securities might well 
have been requisite. 

But what was the fact? — ^what was the truth which his- 
tory vouches ? Why, that the clergy and laity of the Irish 
Catholics, having once submitted to the new government — 
having once plighted their ever unbroken faith to King Wil- 
liam and his successors — having once submitted to that great 
constitutional principle, that in extreme cases the will of the 
people is the sole law — that in extreme cases the people 
have the clear and undoubted right to cashier a tyrant, and 
provide a substitute on the throne — the Irish Catholics, having 
fought for their legitimate sovereign, until he, himself, and, not 
they, fled from the strife — adopted, by treaty, his English suc- 
cessor, though not his heir — transferred to that successor, and 
the inheritors of his throne, their allegiance. They have pre- 
served their covenant — ^with all the temptations and powerful 
motives to disaffection, they fulfilled their part of the social 
contract, even in despite of its violation by the other party. 

How do I prove the continued loyalty of the Catholics of 
Ireland under every persecution ? I do not appeal for any 
proofs to their own records, however genuine — I appeal 
merely to the testimony of their rulers and their ene- 
mies — I appeal to the letters of Primate Boulter — to the 
state-papers of the humane and patriotic Chesterfield. I 
have their loyalty through the admissions of every secretary 
and governor of Ireland, until it is finally and conclusively 
put on record by the legislature of Ireland itself. The relax- 
ing statutes expressly declare, that the penal laws ought to be 
repealed — not from motives of poHcy or growing hberahty, 
but (I quote the words,) " because of the long-continued and 



22 SELECT SPEECHES OF DAKIEL O'CONNELL. 

uninterrupted loyalty of tlie Catliolics." This is the consum- 
mation of my proof — and I defy the veriest disciple of the 
doctrine of delusion to overturn it. 

But as the Cathohcs were faithful iu those dismal and per- 
secuting periods — when they were exasperated by the ema- 
ciating cruelty of barbarous law and wretched pohcy — as they 
were then faithful, notwithstanding every temporal and every 
rehgious temptation and excitement to the contrary, is it in 
human credulity to beUeve my Lord Castlereagh, when he 
asserts that securities are now necessary ? Now, that the ill- 
fated house of Stuart is extinct — and had it not been extinct 
I should have been silent as to what their claims were — now, 
that the will of the people, and the right of hereditary succes- 
sion are not to be separated — now, that the Cathohc clergy 
are educated in Ireland and are all bound by theii" oaths of 
allegiance to that throne and constitution, which, in the room 
of persecution, gives them protection and security — now, that 
aU. claims upon forfeited property are totally extinguished 
in the impenetrable night of obscurity and oblivion — now, that 
the CathoHc nobility and gentry are in the enjoyment of many 
privileges and franchises, and that the full participation of the 
constitution opens upon us in close and cheering prospect — 
shall we be told that securities are now expedient, though 
they were heretofore unnecessary ? Oh ! it is a base and das- 
tardly insult upon our understandings, and on our principles, 
and one which-each of us would, in private life, resent — as in 
pubhc we proclaim it to the contempt and execration of the 
universe. 

Long as I have trepassed on you, I cannot yet close ; I have 
a word to address to you upon your own conduct. The repre- 
sentative for your city, Colonel Yereker, has openly opposed 
your Kberties — he has opposed even the consideration of your 
claims. You are beings, to be sure, with human countenances, 
and the hmbs of men — but you are not men — the iron has en- 
tered into yoiu' souls, and branded the name of slave, upon 
them, if you submit to be thus trampled on ! His opposition to 
you is decided — meet him with a similar, and, if possible, a 
superior hostility. You deserve not freedom, you, citizens of 
Limerick, with the monuments of the valor of your ancestoii 



SPEECH AT LIMERICK. 23 

around you — ^you are less than men, if my feeble tongue be re- 
quisite to rouse you into activity. Your city is, at present, 
nearly a close borough — do but will it, and you make it free, 

I know legal obstacles have been thrown in your way — I 
know that, for months past, the Recorder has sat alone at the 
sessions — that he has not only tried cases, in the absence of any 
other magistrate, which he is not authorized by law to do, but 
that he has solely opened and adjourned the sessions, which, in 
my opinion, he is clearly unwarranted in doing ; he has, by this 
means, I know, delayed the registry of your freeholds, because 
two magistrates are necessary for that purpose : I have, howev- 
er, the satisfaction to tell you, that the Court of King's Bench 
will, in the next term, have to determine on the legality of his 
conduct, and of that of the other charter magistrates, who have 
banished themselves, I understand, from the Sessions Court, 
since the registry has been spoken of! They shall be served 
with the regular notices ; and, depend upon it, this scheme 
cannot long retard you. 

I speak to you on this subject as a lawyer — ^you can best 
judge in what estimation my opinion is amongst you — but 
such as it is, I pledge it to you, that you can easily obviate the 
present obstacles to the registry of your freeholds. I can also 
assure you that the constitution of your city is perfectly free — 
that the sons of freemen, and all those who have served an ap- 
prenticeship to a freeman, are aU entitled to their freedom, and 
to vote for the representation of your city. 

I can teU you more : that if you bring your candidate to a 
poll, your adversary will be deprived of any aid from non-res- 
ident or occasional freemen ; we will strike off his Hst the free- 
men from Gort and Galway, the freemen from the band, and 
many from the battalion of the city of Limerick militia. 

In short, the opening of the borough is a matter of little 
difficulty. If you will but form a committee, and collect 
funds, in your opulent city, you will soon have a representative 
ready to obey your voice — you cannot want a candidate. If 
the emancipation bill passes next sessions, as it is so likely to 
do, and that no other candidate offers, I myself will bring 
your present number to the poU. I probably will have little 
chance of success — but I wUl have the satisfaction of showing 



24 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

this city, and the county, what the free-born mind might 
achieve if it were properly seconded. 

I conclude by conjuring you to exert yourselves ; waste not 
your just resentments in idle applause at the prospect I open 
to you ; let not the feeling of the moment be calumniated as 
a hasty ebullition of anger ; let it not be transitory, as our 
resentments generally are, but let us remember ourselves, our 
children and our country ! 

Let me not, however, close, without obviating any calumny 
that may be flung upon my motives. I can easily pledge my- 
seK to you that they are disinterested and pure — I trust they 
are more. My object in the attainment of emancipation is in 
nothing personal, save in the feelings which parental love 
inspires and gratifies. I am, I trust, actuated by that sense 
of Christianity which teaches us that the first duty of our 
rehgion is benevolence and universal charity ; I am, I know, 
actuated by the determination to rescue our common country 
from the weakness, the insecurity, which dissension and reli- 
gious animosity produce and tend to perpetuate ; I wish to 
see the strength of the island — this unconquered, this uncon- 
querable island — combined to resist the mighty foe of free- 
dom, the extinguisher of civil liberty, who rules the Con- 
tinent from Petersburgh to the verge of the Irish bayo- 
nets in Spaing It is his interest, it is a species of duty 
he owes to his family — to that powerful house which he 
has established on the ruins of the thrones and domina- 
tions of Europe — to extingTiish, forever, representative and 
popular government in these countries ; he has tlie same 
direct intent which the Roman general had to invade our be- 
loved country — " Ut libertas veluti et conspectu." His power 
can be resisted only by combining your physical force with 
your enthusiastic and undaunted hearts. 

There is hberty amongst you stiU. I could not talk as I 
do, of the Liverpools and Castlereaghs, of his court, even if 
he had the folly to employ such things — I wish he had ; you 
have the protection of many a salutary law — of that palla- 
dium of personal hberty — the trial by jury. I wish to ensure 
your hberties, to measui'e your interests on the present order 
of the state, that we may protect the very men that oppress us. 



SPEECH AT LIMERICK. 25 

Yes, if Ireland be fairly roused to the battle of the country 
and of freedom, aU is safe. Britain has been often conquered : 
the Romans conquered her — the Saxons conquered her — 
the Normans conquered her — in short, whenever she was in- 
vaded, she was conquered. But our country was never sub- 
dued ; we never lost our hberties in battle, nor did we ever 
submit to armed conquerors. It is true, the old inhabitants 
lost their country in piece-meal, by fraud and treachery ; they 
relied upon the faith of men, who never, never observed a 
treaty with them, imtil a new and mixed race has sprung up, 
in dissension and discord ; but the Irish heart and soul still 
predominate and pervade the sons of the oppressors them- 
selves. The generosity, the native bravery, the innate fidelity, 
the enthusiastic love of whatever is great and noble — those 
splendid characteristics of the Irish mind remain as the im- 
perishable relics of our country's former greatness — of that il- 
lustrious period, when she was the hght and the glory of barbar- 
ous Europe — when the nations around sought for instruction 
and example in her numerous seminaries — and when the civil- 
ization and religion of all Europe were preserved in her alone. 

You will, my friends, defend her — you may die, but 3' ou 
cannot yield to any foreign invader. Whatever be my fate, I 
shall be happy, whilst I live, in reviving amongst you the love 
and admiration of your native land, and in calling upon Irisli- 
men — no matter how they may worship their common God — 
to sacrifice every contemptible prejudice on the altar of their 
common country. For myself, I shall conclude, by expressing 
the sentiment that throbs in my heart — I shall express it in 
the language of a young bard of Erin, and my beloved friend, 
whose deHghtful muse has the sound of the ancient min- 
strelsy — 

" Still slialt tliou be my midniglit dream — 
Thy glory still my waking theme ; 
And ev'ry thought and wish of mine, 
XJnconquered Erin, shall be thine !" 



26 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

EEPLY TO ME. BELLEW, 
IN THE CATHOLIC BOAED, 1813. 



At this late hour, aud in the exhausted state of the meet- 
ing, it requires all the impulse of duty to overcome my de- 
termination to allow the debate to be closed without any re- 
ply ; but a speech has been delivered by the learned gentle- 
man (Mr. Bellew), which I cannot suffer to pass without fur- 
ther answer. 

My eloquent friend, Mr. O'Gorman, has already powerfully 
exposed some of its fallacies ; but there were topics involved in 
that speech which he has not touched upon, and which, it 
seems to me, I owe it to the Catholics and to Ireland to at- 
tempt to refute. 

It was a speech of much talent, and much labor and prepar- 
ation. 

Mr. Bellew declared that he had spoken extempore. 

Vf ell, (said Mr. O'ConneU,) it was, certainly, an able speech, 
and we shall see whether this extempore effort of the learned 
gentleman will appear in the newspapers to-morrow, in the 
precise words in which it was uttered this day. I have no 
skill in prophecy, if it does not happen ; and if it does so hap- 
pen, it will certainly be a greater miracle than that the learned 
gentleman should have made an artful and ingenuous, though, 
I confess, I think a very mischievous speech, without prepara- 
tion. 

I beg to say, that, in replying to him and to the other 
supporters of the amendment, I mean to speak with great 
personal respect of them ; but that I feel myseK bound to 
treat their arguments with no small degree of reprehension. 
The learned gentleman naturally claims the gTcater part of 
my attention. The ingenuity with which he has, I trust, 
gratuitously advocated our bigoted enemies, and the abun- 
dance in which he has dealt out insinuations against the 
Cathohcs of Ireland, entitle his discourse to the first place 
in my reprobation. Yet I shall take the liberty of saying a 
passing word of the other speakers, before I arrive at him ; 



KEPLY TO MR. BELLEW, 27 

he sliall be last, but I promise him, not least in my consid- 
eration. 

The opposition to the general vote of thanks to the bi shops 
was led by my friend, Mr, Hussey. I attended to his speech 
with that regard which I always feel for anything that comes 
from him ; I attended to it in the expectation of hearing from 
his sln:ewd and distinct mind something like argument or rea- 
soning against this expression of gratitude to our prelates. 
But, my lord, I was entirely disappointed ; argument there was 
not any — reasouing there was none ; the sum and substance of 
his discourse was hterally this, that he (Mr. Hussey) is a man 
of a prudent and economical turn of mind, that he sets a great 
value on everything that is good, that praise is excellent, and, 
therefore, he is disposed to be even stingy and niggard of it ; 
that my motion contains four times too much of that excellent 
article, and he, therefore, desires to strike off three parts of my 
motion, and thinks that one quarter of his praise is full enough 
for any bishops, and this the learned gentleman calls an 
amendment. 

Mr. Bagot came next, and he told us that he had made a 
speech but a fortnight ago, which we did not understand, and 
he has now added another which is unintelligible ; and so, be- 
cause he was misunderstood before, and cannot be compre- 
hended at present, he concludes, most logically, that the bish- 
ops are wrong, and that he and Mr. Hussey are right. 

Sir Edward Bellew was the next advocate of censure on the 
bishops ; he entertained us with a sad specimen of minor po- 
lemics, and drew a learned and lengthened distinction between 
essential and non-essential discipline ; and he insisted that by 
virtue of this distinction, that which was called schism by the 
Cathohc prelates, could be changed into orthodoxy by an Irish 
baronet. This distinction between essential and non-essential, 
must, therefore, be very beautiful and beautifying. It must 
be very sublime, as it is very senseless, unless, indeed, he 
means to tell us, that it contains some secret allusion to our 
enemies./ For example, that the Duke of Richmond affords 
an instance of the essential, whilst my Lord Manners is plainly 
non-essential ; that Paddy Duigenan is essential in perfec- 
tion, and the foppish Peel is, in nature, without essence ; that 



28 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

Jack Giffarcl is, surely, of the essential breed, whilst Mr, 
Willy Saurin is a dog of a different color. 

Such, I presume, is the plain EngUsh of the worthy baron- 
et's dissertation. Translated thus, it clearly enough alludes to 
the new commission ; but it would be more difficult to show 
how it apphed in argument against my motion. I really did 
not expect so whimsical an opposition from the honorable bar- 
onet. If there be any feeling of disappointment about him for 
the rejection of the double Yeto bill, he certainly ought not to 
take revenge on the Board, by bestowing on us all the tedious- 
ness of incomprehensible and insane theology. I altogether 
disclaim reasoning with him, and I freely consent that those 
who rehsh his authority as a theologian, should vote against 
the prelates. 

And, now, I address myself to the learned brother of the 
theological baronet. He began by taking great merit to him- 
seK, and demanding great attention from you, because he says 
that he has so rarely addressed you. You should yield to him, 
he says, because he so seldom requires your assent. It reminds 
me of the prayer of the English officer before battle. " Great 
Lord," said he, " during the forty years I have hved, I never 
troubled you before with a single prayer. I have, therefore, a 
right, that you should grant me one request, and do just as I 
desire, for this once." Such was the manner in which the 
learned gentleman addressed us ; ho begs you will confide in 
his zeal for your interests, because he has hitherto confined 
that zeal to his own. He desires that you will rely upon 
his attention to your affairs because he has been heretofore inat- 
tentive to them ; and that you may depend on his anxiety 
for Catholic Emancipation, inasmuch as he has abstained from 
taking any step to attain that measure. 

Quite diflerent are my humble claims on your notice — quite 
different are the demands I make on your confidence. I hum- 
bly sohcit it because I have sacrificed, and do, and ever will 
sacrifice, my interest to yoius — because I have attended to the 
varying postvure of your affairs, and sought for Catholic Eman- 
cipation with an activity and energy proportioned to the great 
object of our pursuit. I do, therefore, entreat yoiu* attention, 
whilst I unravel the spider-web of sophistry with which the 



REPLY TO MR. BELLEW. 29 

learned gentleman has tliis day souglit to embarrass and dis- 
figure your cause. 

His discourse was divided into three principal heads. First, 
he charged the Catholic prelates with indiscretion. Secondly, 
he charged them with error. And lastly, he charged the Cath- 
chcs with bigotry ; and with the zeal and anxiety of an hired 
advocate, he gratuitously vindicated the intolerance of our op- 
pressors. I beg your patience, whilst I follow the learned 
gentleman through this threefold arrangement of his subject. 
I shall, however, invert the order of his arrangement, and be- 
gin Math his third topic. 

His argument, in support of the intolerants, runs thus. 
First, he alleges that the Cathohcs are attached to their 
rehgion with a bigoted zeal. I admit the zeal but I utterly 
deny the bigotry. He seems to think I overcharge his state- 
ment ; perhaps I do ; but I feel confident that, in substance, 
this accusation amounted to a direct charge of bigotry. 
Well, having charged the Catholics with a bigoted attach- 
ment to their church, and having truly stated our repug- 
nance to any interference on the part of the secretaries of 
the Castle with our prelates, he proceeded to insist that those 
feelings on our part justified the apprehensions of the Pro- 
testants. The Cathohcs, said Mr. Bellew, are alarmed for 
their church ; why should not the Protestants be alarmed also 
for theirs ? The Catholic, said he, desires safety for his reli- 
gion ; why should not the Protestant require security for his ? 
When you, Cathohcs, express your anxiety for the purity of 
your faith (adds the learned advocate), you demonstrate the 
necessity there is for the Protestant to be vigilant for the pre- 
servation of his belief ; and hence, Mr. Bellew concludes, _that 
it is quite natural, and quite justifiable in the Liverpools and 
Eldons of the Cabinet, to invent and insist upon guards and 
securities, vetoes, and double vetoes, boards of control, and 
commissions for loyalty. 

Before I reply to this attack upon us, and vindication of our 
enemies, let me observe, that, however groundless the 
learned gentleman may be in argument, his friends at the 
Castle will, at least, have the benefit of boasting, that such 
assertions have been made by a Cathohc, at the Cathohc Board. 



30 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

And, now, see how futile and unfounded his reasoning is ; 
he says, that our disHke to the proposed commission justifies 
the suspicion in which the plan of such commission originated ; 
that our anxiety for the preservation of our church vindicates 
those who deem the proposed arrangement necessary for the 
protection of theirs — a mode of reasoning perfectly true, and 
perfectly applicable, if we sought any interference with, or 
control over, the Protestant Church. If we deshed to form 
any board or commission to control or to regulate the appoint- 
ment of their bishops, deans, archdeacons, rectors, or curates ; 
if we asked or requu'ed that a single Catholic should be con- 
sulted upon the management of the Protestant Church, or of 
its revenues or privileges ; then, indeed, would the learned 
gentleman be right in his argument, and then would he have, 
by our example, vindicated our enemies. 

But the fact does not bear liim out ; for we do not seek, 
nor desu'e, nor would we accept of, any kind of interference 
with the Protestant Church. We disclaim and disavow any 
kind of control over it. We ask not, nor would we allow, 
any Catholic authority over the mode of appointment of their 
clergy. Nay, we are quite content to be excluded for ever 
from even advising his Majesty, with respect to any matter 
relating to or concerning the Protestant Church — its rights, its 
properties, or its privileges. I will, for my own part, go much 
further ; and I do declare, most solemnly, that I would feel 
and express equal, if not stronger repugnance to the inter- 
ference of a Catholic with the Protestant Church, than that I 
have expressed and do feel to any Protestant interference with 
ours. In opposing their interference with us, I content my- 
self with the mere war of words. But if the case were re- 
versed — if the Catholic sought this control over the rehgion 
of the Protestant, the Protestant should command my heart, 
my tongue, my arm, in opposition to so unjust and insulting a 
measure. So help me God ! I would in that case not only 
feel for the Protestant and speak for him, but I Avould fight 
for him, and cheerfully sacrifice my life in defence of the great 
principle for which I have ever contended — the principle of 
universal and complete religious hberty. 

Then, can any thing be more absurd and untenable than tlto 



REPLY TO MR. BELLEW. 3J 

argument of the learned gentleman, when you see it stripped 
of the false coloring he has given it ? It is absurd to say, 
that merely because the Catholic desires to keep his religion 
free, the Protestant is thereby justified in seeldng to enslave it. 
Beverse the position and see whether the learned gentleman 
will adopt or enforce it. The Protestant desires to preserve 
his religion free ; would that justify the Catholic in any at- 
tempt to enslave it ? I will take the learned advocate of in- 
tolerance to the bigoted court of Spain or Portugal, and ask 
him, would he, in the supposed case, insist that the Catholic 
was justifiable. No, my lord, he wiU not venture to assert 
that the Catholic would be so ; and I boldly tell him that in 
such a case, the Protestant would be unquestionably right, 
the Cathohc, certainly, an insolent bigot. 

But the learned gentleman has invited me to a discussion of 
the question of securities, and I cheerfully follow him. And I 
do, my lord, assert, that the Catholic is warranted in the most 
scrupulous and timid jealousy of any English, for I will not call 
it Protestant, (for it is political, and not, in truth, religious) in- 
terference with his church. And I will also assert, and am 
ready to prove, that the Enghsh have no sohd or rational pre- 
text for requkiag any of those guards, absurdly called securi- 
ties, over us or our religion. 

My lord, the Irish Catholics never, never broke their faith 
— they never violated their plighted promise to the EngHsh. I 
appeal to history for the truth of my assertion. My lord, the 
Enghsh never, never observed their faith with us, they never 
performed their plighted promise ; the history of the last six 
hundred years proves the accuracy of my assertion. I will 
leave the older periods, and fix myself at the Kevolution. More 
than one hundred and twenty years have elapsed since the 
treaty of Limerick ; that treaty has been honorably and 
faithfully performed by the Irish Catholics ; it has been 
foully, disgracefully, and dhectly violated by the EngHsh. 
English oaths and solemn engagements bound them to 
its performance ; it remains still of force and unperformed ; 
and the ruffian yell of English treachery wliich accompanied 
its first violation, has, it seems, been repeated even in the sen- 
ate house at the last repetition of the violation of that 



32 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

treaty. They rejoiced and they shouted at the perjuries of 
their ancestors — at their=own want of good faith or common 
sense. 

Nay, are there not present men who can tell us, of then- own 
knowledge, of another instance of Enghsh treachery? Was 
not the assent of many of the Catholics to the fatal — oh ! the 
fatal measure of the Union — purchased by tliQ express and 
written promise of Cathohc Emancipation, made from author- 
ity by Lord CornwaUis, and confirmed by the prime minister, 
Mr, Pitt? And has that promise been performed? or has 
Irish credulity afforded only another instance of English faith- 
lessness ? Now, my lord, I ask this assembly whether • they 
can confide in English promises ? I say nothing of the solemn 
pledges of individuals. Can you confide in the more than 
punic faith of your hereditary task-masters? or shall we be 
accused of our scrupulous jealousy, when we reject with 
indignation, the contamination of English control over our 
church ? 

But, said the learned advocate (Mr. BeUew), they have a 
right to .demand, because they stand in need of securities. I 
deny the right — I deny the need. There is not any such right 
— there exists no such necessity. What security have they 
had for the century that has elapsed since the violation of the 
treaty of Limerick ? What security have they had during these 
years of oppression and barbarous and bloody legislation? 
What security have they had whilst the hereditary claim of 
the house of Stuart remained ? And surely, all the right that 
hereditary descent could give was vested iu that family. Let 
me not be misunderstood. I admit they had no right ; I ad- 
mit that their right was taken away by the people. I freely 
admit that, on the contrary, the people have the clear right 
to cashier base and profligate princes. What security had 
the English from our bishops when Engltind was invaded, 
and the unfortunate but gallant Prince Charles advanced 
into the heart of England, guided -by valor, and accompa- 
nied by a handful of brave men, who had, under his com- 
mand, obtained more than one victory ? He was a man likely 
to excite and gratify Irish enthusiasm ; he Avas chivalrous and 
brave ; he was a man of honor, and a gentleman ; no violator 



BEPLY TO MR. BELLEW. 33 

of liis word; he spent not his time in making his soldiers ridic- 
ulous with horse-tails and white feathers ; he did not consume 
his mornings in tasting curious drams, and evenings in gallant- 
ing old women. What security had the English then ? What 
security had they against our bishops or our laity, when Amer- 
ica nobly flung off the yoke that had become too heavy to be 
borne, and sought her independence at the risk of her being ? 
What security had they then ? I will tell you, my lord. Their 
security at all those periods was perfect and complete, because 
it existed in the conscientious allegiance of the Catholics ; it 
consisted in the duty of allegiance which the Irish Catholics 
have ever held, and will, I trust, ever hold sacred ; it consisted 
in the conscientious submission to legitimate authority, however 
oppressive, which our bishops have always preached, and our 
laity have always practised. 

And now, my lord, they have the additional security of our 
oaths, of our ever unviolated oaths of allegiance ; and if they 
had emancipated us, they would have had the additional secu- 
rity of our gratitude and of our personal and immediate inter- 
ests. We have gone through persecution and sorrow ; we 
have experienced oppression and affliction, and yet we have 
continued faithful. How absurd to think that additional secu- 
rity could be necessary to guard against conciUation and kind- 
ness! 

But it is not bigotry that requires those concessions ; tliey 
were not invented by mere intolerance. The English do not 
dislike us as Cathohcs — they simply hate us as Irish ; they ex- 
haust their blood and treasure for the Papists of Spain ; they 
have long observed and cherished a close and affectionate alli- 
ance with the ignorant and bigoted Papists of Portugal ; and 
now they exert every sinew to preserve those Papists from the 
horrors of a foreign yoke. They emancipated the French Pa- 
pists in Canada, and a German Papist is allowed to rise to the 
first rank in his profession — the army ; he can command not 
only Irish but even English Protestants. Let us, therefore, be 
just ; there is no such horror of Popery in England as is sup- 
posed ; they have a great dislike to Irish Papists ; but separate 
the qualities — put the filthy whiskers and foreign visage of a 
German on the animal, and the Papist is entitled to high favor 



34 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

from tlie just and discriminating English. We fight their bat- 
tles ; we beat their enemies ; Ave pay their taxes, and we are 
degraded, oppressed and insulted, whilst the Spanish, the 
Portuguese, the French, and the German Papists are courted, 
cherished and promoted. 

I revert now to the, learned gentleman's accusation of the 
bishops. He has accused them of error in doctrine and of 
indiscretion in practice. He tells us that he is counsel to the 
college of Maynooth, and, in that capacity, he seems to arro- 
gate to himself much theological and legal knowledge. I con- 
cede the law, but I deny the divinity ; neither can I admit the 
accuracy of the eulogium which he has pronounced on that 
institution, with its mongrel board of control — half Papist and 
half Protestant. I was indeed at a loss to account for the 
strange want of talent — for the silence of Irish genius which 
has been remarked within the college. I now see it easily ex- 
plained. The incubus of jealous and rival intolerance sits 
upon its walls, and genius, and taste, and talent fly from the 
sad dormitoty, where sleeps the spirit of dullness. I have heard, 
indeed, of their Crawleys and their converts, but where or 
when, will that college produce a Magee or a Sandes, a M'Don- 
nell or a Griffin ? When will the warm heart of Irish genius 
exhibit in Maynooth such bright examples of worth and talent 
as those men disclose ? Is it true, that the bigot may rule in 
Trinity College ; the highest station in it may be the reward 
of writing an extremely bigoted and more foohsh pamphlet ; 
but stiU there is no conflicting principle of hostile jealousy in 
its rulers ; and therefore Irish genius does not slumber there, 
nor is it smothered as at Maynooth. 

The accusation of error brought against the bishops by the 
learned gentleman, is sustained simply upon his opinion and 
authority. The matter stands thus : — at the one side, we have 
the most Eev. and right Rev. the Catholic prelates of Ireland, 
who assert that there is schism in the proposed arrangement ; 
on the other side, we have the very Rev. the counsel for 
the college of Maynooth, who asserts that there is no schism 
in that arrangement. These are the conflicting authorities. 
The Rev. prelates assert the one ; he, the counsellor, asserts 
the other ; and, as we have not leisure to examine the point 



EEPLY TO ME. BELLEW. 35 

here doctrinally, we are reduced to the sad dilemma of 
choosing between the prelates and the lawyer. There may 
be a want of taste in the choice which I make, but I 
confess I cannot but prefer the bishops. I shall, there- 
fore, say with them, there would be schism in the arrange- 
ment, and deny the assertion of the Rev. counsel, that it 
would not be schism. But suppose his reverence, the coun- 
sel for Maynooth, was right, and the bishops wrong, and that 
in the new arrangement there would be no schism, I then say, 
there would be worse ; there would be corruption, and profli- 
gacy, and subserviency to the Castle in it, and its degrading 
effects would soon extend themselves to every rank and class 
of the Cathohcs. 

I now come to the second charge which the learned gentle- 
man, in his capacity of counsel to the college of Maynooth, 
has brought against the bishops. It consists of the high 
crime of "indiscretion." They were indiscreet, said he, in 
coming forward so soon and so boldly. What, when they 
found that a plan had been formed which they knew to be 
schismatic and degrading — ^when they found that this plan 
was matured, and printed, and brought into parliament, 
and embodied in a biU, and read twice in the House of 
Commons, without any consultation with, and, as it were, in 
contempt of the Cathohcs of Ireland — shall it be said, that it 
was either premature or indiscreet, solemnly and loudly to 
protest against such plan! If it were indiscreet, it was an 
indiscretion which I love and admire — a necessary indiscre- 
tion, unless, perhaps, the learned counsel for Maynooth, may 
imagine that the proper time would not arrive for this protest 
until the bill had actually passed, and all protest should be 
unavaihng. 

No, my lord, I cannot admire this thing called Catholic 
discretion, which would manage our affairs in secret, and de- 
clare our opinions, when it was too late to give them any 
importance. Catholic discretion may be of value at the Cas- 
tle ; a Cathohc secret may be carried, to be discounted there 
for prompt payment. The learned gentleman may also tell us 
the price that Cathohc discretion bears at the Castle, 
whether it be worth a place, a peerage, or a pension. But, 



36 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

if it have value and a price for individuals, it is of no 
worth to the CathoHc people. I reject and abjure it as 
«• applicable to public officers. Our opinions ought to be 
formed deliberately, but they should be announced manfully 
and distinctly. We should be despicable, and deserve to con- 
tinue in slavery, if we could equivocate or disguise our senti- 
ments on those subjects of vital importance ; and I call upon 
you to thank the Cathohc prelates, precisely because they had 
not the learned gentleman's quahty of discretion, and that 
they had the real and genuine discretion, which made them 
publish resolutions consistent with their exalted rank and rev- 
erend character, and most consonant to the wishes and views 
of the Cathohc people of Ireland. 

I now draw to a close, and I conjure you not to come to any 
division. Let the amendment be withdrawn by my learned 
fiiend, and let our approbation of our amiable and excellent, 
our dignified and independent prelates, be, as it ought to be, 
unanimous. "We want unanimity ; we require to combine in 
the constitutional pursuit of CathoHc Emancipation every 
class and rank of the Catholics — the prelate and the peer, the 
country gentleman and the farmer, the peasant and his priest ; 
our career is to begin again ; let our watchword be unanimity, 
and our object be plain and undisguised, as it has been, 
namely, simple Eepeal. Let us not involve or embarrass our- 
selves with vetoes, and arrangements, and securities, and 
guards, and pretexts of divisions, and all the implements for 
ministerial corruption, and Castle dominion ; let our cry be 
simple Eepeal. 

It is well — it is very well that the late bill has been rejected. 
I rejoice that it has been scouted. Our sapient friends at 
Cork called it a " Charter of Emancipation." You, my lord, 
called it so ; but, with much respect, you and they are gi'eatly 
mistaken. In truth, it was no charter at all, nor hke a char- 
ter ; and it would not have emancipated. This charter of 
emancipation was no charter ; and would give no emancipa- 
tion. As a plain, prose-like expression, it was unsuiDported ; 
and, as a figure and fiction, it made very bad poetry. No, my 
lord, the bill would have insulted your rehgion, and done 
almost nothing for your liberties ; it would have done nothing 



EEPLY TO MR. BELLE W. 37 

at all for the people — it would send a few of our discreet Ca- 
tholics, with their Castle-discretion, into the House of Com- 
mons, but it would not have enabled Catholic peers in Ireland 
to vote for the representative peers ; and thus the blunder 
arose, because those friends, who, I am told, took so much 
trouble for you, examined the act of Union only, and did not 
take the trouble of examining the act regulating the mode of 
voting for the representative peers. 

The bill would have done nothing for the Catholic bar, save 
the paltry dignity of silk gowns ; and it would have actually 
deprived that bar of the places of assistant-barrister, which as 
the law stands, they may enjoy. It would have done nothing 
in corporations — hterally nothing at all ; and when I pressed 
this on Mr. Plunket, and pointed out to him the obstacles to 
corporate rights, in a conference with which, since his return 
to Ireland, he honored me, he informed me — and informed me 
of course truly — that the reason why the corporations could 
not be further opened, or even the Bank of Ireland mentioned, 
was, because the Enghsh would not listen to any violation of 
chartered rights ; and this bill, my lord — this inefficient, use- 
less, and insulting biU — must be dignified with the appellation 
of a " Charter of Emancipation." I do most respectfully en- 
treat, my lord, that the expression may be well considered be- 
fore it is used again. 

And now let me entreat, let me conjure the meeting to ban- 
ish every angry emotion, every sensation of rivalship or oppo- 
sition ; let us recollect that we owe this vote to the imim- 
peached character of our worthy prelates. Even our enemies 
respect them ; and, in the fury of rehgious and political cal- 
umny, the breath even of hostile and polemical slander has 
not reached them. Shall Cathohcs, then, be found to express 
or even to imply censure ? 

Recollect, too, that your country requires your unanimous 
support. Poor, degraded, and fallen Ireland ! has you, and, I 
may almost say, you alone to cheer and sustain her. Her 
friends have been lukewarm and faint hearted ; her enemies 
are vigUant, active, yelling, and insulting. In the name of 
your country, I call on you not to divide, but to consecrate 
your unanimous efforts to her support, tiU bigotry shall be 
put to flight, and oppression banished this land for ever. 



38 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 



SPEECH IN 1813 ON EEQUIEING SECUEITIES FROM 
THE CATHOLICS. 



Having come here determined to address tliis meeting, I 
avail myself of this opportunity to sohcit your patience and 
attention. Let me, in the first place, congratulate you on the 
progress which the principle of rehgious hberty has made 
since you last met. It has been greatly advanced by a mag- 
nificent discovery lately made by the Enghsh in ethics, and 
upon which I also beg leave to congratulate you. It is this : 
Several sagacious Enghshmen have discovered, in the nine- 
teenth century, and more than four hundred years after the 
propagation of science was facilitated by the art of printing — 
several sagacious Englishmen have made this wonderful dis- 
covery in moral philosophy, that a man is not necessarily a 
worse citizen for having a conscience, and that a conscien- 
tious adherence to a Christian rehgion is not an offence deserv- 
ing of degradation or punishment. 

The operation, however, of this discovery had its oppo- 
nents ; like gravitation and the cow-pock, it has been opposed, 
and, for the jpresent, opposed with success ; but the principle 
has not been resisted. Yes, our enemies themselves have 
been forced to concede our right to emancipation. Duigenan, 
and Nichol, and Scott are laughed at — not hstened to ; the 
principle is admitted — the right of liberty of conscience is not 
controverted — ^your emancipation is certain — ^it is now only a 
question of terms — it only remains to be seen whether we shall 
be emancipated upon their terms or upon ours. 

They offer you emancipation, as CathoUcs, if you will kindly 
consent, in return, to become schismatics. They offer you hb- 
erty, as men, if you agree to become slaves after a new fash- 
ion — that is, your friends and your enemies have declared that 
you are entitled to Catholic emancipation and freedom, upon 
the trifling terms of schism and servitude ! 
■^--^Xrenerous enemies ! — bountiful friends ! Yesj in their bounty 
they resemble the debtor who should address his creditor 



ON EEQUIEING SECUEITIES FROM THE CATHOLICS. 39 

tlius : — " It is true, I owe you XlOO ; I am perfectly well able 
to pay you ; but what will you give me if I hand you 65. Sd. 
in the pound of your just debt, as a final adjustment ?" 
" Let us allay all jealousies," continues the debtor — let 
us put an end to all animosities — I will give you one-third 
of what I owe you, if you will give me forty shilhngs in the 
pound of additional value, and a receipt in full, duly stamped 
into the bargain." 

But why do I treat this serious and melancholy subject 
with levity ? Why do I jest when my heart is sore and sad ? 
Because I have not patience at this modern cant of securities, 
and vetoes, and arrangements, and clauses, and commissions. 
Securities against what ? Not against the irritation and dis- 
like which may and naturally ought to result from prolonged 
oppression and insult. Securities — not against the conse- 
quences of dissensions, distrusts, and animosities. Securities 
— not against foreign adversaries. The securities that are re- 
quired from us are against the effects of conciliation and kind- 
ness — against the dangers to be apprehended from domestic 
union, peace, and cordiality. If they do not emancipate us — 
if they leave us ahens and outlaws in our native land — if they 
continue our degradation, and all those grievances that, at 
present, set our passions at war with our duty ; then, they 
have no pretext for asking, nor do they require any securities ; 
but should they raise us to the rank of Irishmen — should they 
give us an immediate and personal interest in our native land 
— should they share with us the blessings of the constitution 
— should they add to our duty the full tide of our interests and 
affection ; then — then, say they, securities will be necessary. 
Securities and guards must be adopted. State bridles must 
be invented, and shackles and manacles must be forged, lest, 
in the intoxication of new hberty, we should destroy, only be- 
cause we have a greater interest to preserve. 

And do they — do these security-men deserve to be reasoned 
with ? I readily admit — I readily proclaim Grattan's purity — 
his integrity — his patriotism ; but, in his eagerness to obtain 
for us that hberty, for which he has so long and so zealously 
contended, he has overlooked the absurdity which those men 
fall into, who demand securities against the consequences of 



40 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

emancipation, whilst tliey look for no securities against tlie 
effects of injustice and contumely. 

Grattan lias also overlooked the insult to our understand- 
ings and to our moral feehngs which this demand for securities 
inflicts. Grattan is mistaken up on this topic ; but he is the 
only man who is merely mistaken. The cry for securities has 
been raised, merely to retard the progress of emancipation. 
Canning affects to be our friend, because, since his conduct to 
his colleague, Yiscount Castlereagh, he has found it difficult to 
obtain a niche in any administration. God preserve us from 
the friendship of Mr. Canning ! I have no apprehension of 
Mr. Canning's enmity : he was our avowed enemy ; that is, he 
always voted against us, from the moment he got pension or 
place under Pitt, to the time when he was dismissed from office, 
and rendered hopeless of regaining it. And, as for Lord Cas- 
tlereagh, rely on it, that, though he may consent to change one 
kind of degradation for another, he never will consent to your 
attaining your freedom : and was it to obtain the vote of 
Lord Castlereagh that Grattan gave up our honor and our re- 
ligion ? Does Grattan forget — does he forgive the artificer of 
the Union, or the means by which it was achieved ? Does not 
Grattan know that Lord Castlereagh first dyed his country in 
blood, and then sold her. 

But, I repeat it, I have not patience, common patience with 
those men who cry out for securities, and will not see that they 
would obtain real security from the generous concession of 
plain right — from conciliation and kindness ; all reasoning, all 
experience proves that justice to the Catholics ought to be, 
and has been, in the moments of distress and peril, the first 
and best security to the state. I will not stoop to argue the 
theory with any man. I will not condescend to enter into an 
abstract reasoning to prove that safety to a government ought 
to result from justice and kindness to the people, but I will 
point out the evidence of facts which demonstrate, that con- 
cession to L-ish Catholics has in itself been resorted to, and 
produced security to our government — that they have consid- 
ered and found it to be a security in itseK — a safeguard against 
the greatest evils and calamities, and not a cause of danger or 
apprehension. 



ON EEQUIRING SECURITIES FROM THE CATHOLICS. 41 

Ireland, in tlie connection with England, lias but too con- 
stantly shared the fate of the prodigal's dog — I mean no per- 
sonal allusion — she has been kicked in the insolence of pros- 
perity, and she has borne all the famine and distress of ad- 
versity. Ireland has done more — she has afforded an abun- 
dant source of safety and security to England in the midst 
of every adversity; and at the hour of her calamity, Eng- 
land has had only to turn to Ireland with the offer of friend- 
ship and cordiality, and she has been rewarded by our cordial 
and unremitting succor. 

Trace the history of the penal laws in their leading fea- 
tures, and you will see the truth of my assertion. The capitu- 
lation of Limerick was signed on the 3rd October, 1691. Our 
ancestors, by that treaty, stipulated for, and were promised 
the perfect freedom of their rehgion, and that no other oath 
should be imposed on Cathohcs, save the oath of allegiance. 
The Irish performed the entire of that treaty on their part : 
it remains unperformed, as it certainly is of force, in point of 
justice, to this hour, on the part of the English. Even in the 
reign of WiUiam, it was violated by that prince, whose gener- 
als and judges signed that treaty — by that prince who himself 
confirmed and enrolled it. 

But he was the same prince that signed the order for the 
horrible, cold-blooded assassination and massacre of the un- 
fortunate Macdonalds of Glencoe ; and if his violation of the 
Limerick treaty was confined to some of the articles, it was 
only because the alteration in the succession, and the ex- 
treme pressure of foreign affairs, did not render it prudent nor 
convenient to offer further injury and injustice to the Irish 
Catholics. 

But the case was altered in the next reign. The power and 
the glory, which England acquired by her achievements, under 
Marlborough — the internal strength, arising from the posses- 
sion of hberty, enabled her to treat Ireland at her caprice, and 
she accordingly poured the full vial of her hatred upon the un- 
fortunate Cathohcs of Ireland. England was strong and 
proud, and, therefore, unjust. The treaty of Limerick was 
trampled under foot — ^justice, and humanity, and conscience 
were trodden to the earth, and a code of laws inflicted on 



42 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

the IrisTi Catholics, which Montesquieu has well said, ought 
to have beeu written in blood, and of which you still feel the 
emaciating cruelty — a code of laws which stni leave you aliens 
in the land of your ancestors. Aliens! — did I say? Alas! 
you have not the privileges of alienage ; for the ahen can insist 
upon having six of his jury of liis own nation, whilst you may 
have twelve Orangemen on yours. 

But to return to our own history. The reigns of the First 
and of the Second George passed away ; England continued 
strong ; she persevered in oppression and injustice ; she was 
powerful and respected ; she, therefore, disregarded the suffer- 
ings of the Irish, and increased their chains. The Cathohcs 
once had the presumption to draw up a petition ; it was pre- 
sented to Primate Boulter, then governing Ireland. He not 
only rejected it with scorn and without a reply, but treated the 
insolence of daring to complain as a crime, and punished it as 
an offence, by recommending and procuring still more severe 
laws against the Papists, and the more active execution of the 
former statutes. 

But a new era advanced ; the war which George the Sec- 
ond waged on account of Hanover and America, exhausted 
the resources, and lessened, while it displayed, the strength 
of England. In the meantime the Duke of Bedford was 
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. The ascendency mob of DubHn, 
headed by a Lucas, insulted the Lord Lieutenant with impu- 
nity, and threatened the parliament. All was riot and con- 
fusion within, whilst France had prepared an army and a fleet 
for the invasion of Ireland. Serious danger menaced England. 
The very connection between the countries was in danger. 
The Cathohcs were, for the first time, thought of with favor. 
They were encouraged to address the Lord Lieutenant, and, 
for the first time, their address received the courtesy of a re- 
ply. By tliis slight civility (the more welcome for its novelty) 
the warm hearts and ready hands of the Irish Catholics were 
purchased. The foreign foe was deterred from attempting to 
invade a country where he could no longer have found a 
friend ; the domestic insurgents were awed into silence ; the 
Catholics and the government, simply by their combination, 
saved the state from its perils ; and thus did the Cathohcs, in 



ON EEQUIRrNG SECUEITIES FEOM THE CATHOLICS. 43 

a period of danger, and upon tlie very first application, and 
in return for no more than kind words, give, what we want 
to give, security to the empire. 

From the year 1759, to the American war, England enjoyed 
strength and peace ; the CathoUcs were forgotten, or recol- 
lected only for the purposes of oppression. England in her 
strength and her insolence oppressed America ; she persevered 
in an obstinate and absurd course of vexation, until America 
revolted, flew to arms, conquered, and established her inde- 
pendence and her hberty. 

This brings us to the second stage of modem Catholic his- 
tory : for England, having been worsted in more than one 
battle in America, and having gained victories more fatal 
than many defeats, America, aided by France, having pro- 
claimed independence, the English period for liberahty and 
justice arrived, for she was in distress and dijfficulty. Dis- 
tracted at home — baffled and despised abroad, she was com- 
pelled to look to Irish resources, and to seek for security in 
Ireland ; accordingly, in the year 1778, our Emancipation 
commenced ; the Catholics were hired into the active service 
of the state by an easy gratuity of a small share of their 
rights as human beings, and they in return gave, what we 
now desire to give, security to the empire. 

The pressure of foreign evils, however, returned ; Spain and 
Holland joined with France and America; success in her 
contest with the Colonies became daily more hopeless. The 
combined fleets swept the ocean; the Enghsh channel saw 
their superiority ; the English fleet abandoned for a while the 
dominion of the sea ; the national debt terrified and impover- 
ished the country; distress and difficulty pressed on every 
side, and, accordingly, we arrived at the second stage of Ca- 
tholic Emancipation ; for, in 1782, at such a period as I have 
described, a second statute was passed, enlarging the privi- 
leges of the Catholics, and producing, in their gratitude find 
zeal, that security which we now tender to the sinking vessel 
of the state. 

From 1782 to 1792, was a period of tranquiUity ; the ex- 
penses of the government were diminished, and her commerce 
greatly increased. The loss of America, instead of being an 



44 SELECT SPEECHES OP DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

evil, became an advantage to trade as well as to liberty. Eng- 
land again flourislied, and agaia forgot us. 

In 1792, the CathoKcs urged their claims, as they had 
more than once done before. But the era was inauspicious to 
them, for England was in prosperity. On the Continent, the 
confederation of German princes, and the assemblage of the 
French princes, with their royalist followers, the treaty of Pil- 
nitz, and the army of the King of Prussia, gave hope of crush- 
ing and extinguishing France and her hberties for ever. At 
that moment the Catholic petition was brought before parha- 
ment; it was not even suffered, according to the course of 
ordinary courtesy, to He on the table ; it was rejected with indig- 
nation and with contempt. The head of the La Touche fam- 
ily, which has since produced so many first-rate Irishmen, then 
retained that Huguenot hatred for Cathohcs which is still 
cherished by Sam^in, the Attorney-General for Ireland. La 
Touche proposed that the petition should be rejected, and it 
was rejected by a majority of 200 to only 13. 

Fortune, however, changed. The invasion of the Prussians 
was unsuccessful ; the French people worshipping the name, 
as if it were the reahty of liberty, chased the Duke of 
Brunswick from their soil ; the King of Prussia, in the Lut- 
trel style, sold the pass ; the German princes were confound- 
ed, and the French princes scattered ; Dumouriez gained the 
battle of Jemappes, and conquered the Austrian Netherlands ; 
the old governments of Em'ope were struck with consterna- 
tion and dismay, and we arrived at the fourth, and hitherto 
the last stage of emancipation ; for, after those events, in 
1793, was passed that act which gave us many valuable poKt- 
ical rights — many important privileges. 

The parliament — the same men who, in 1792, would not 
suffer our petition to lie on the table — the men who, in 1792, 
treated us with contempt, in the short space of a few months, 
granted us the elective franchise. In 1792, we were desj^ised 
and rejected ; in 1793, we were flattered and favored. The 
reason was obvious ; in the year 1792, England was safe ; in 
1793 she wanted security, and security she found in the 
emancipation of the Cathohcs, partial though it was and lim- 
ited. The spirit of republican frenzy was abroad ; the en- 



ON REQUIRING SECURITIES FROM THE CATHOLICS. 45 

tliusiasm for liberty, even to madness, pervaded the public 
mind. The Presbyterians and Dissenters of the North of 
Ireland were strongly infected with that mania ; and had not 
England wisely and prudently bought all the Catholic nobiUty 
and gentry, and the far greater part of the Cathohc people 
out of the market of republicanism, that which fortunately 
was but a rebelhon, would, most assuredly, have been revolu- 
tion. The Presbyterians and Catholics would have united, 
and, after wading through the bloody delirium of a sanguin- 
ary revolution, we should now, in all hkehhood, have some 
mihtary adventurer seated on the throne of our legitimate 
sovereign. 

But, I repeat it, England judged better ; she was just and 
kind, and therefore she has been preserved. She sought for 
security where alone it could be found, and she obtained it. 

Thus, in 1759, England wanted security against the turbu- 
lence of her ascendency faction in Ireland, and against the 
fleet and arms of France ; she was civil and courteous to the 
Catholics, and the requisite security was the result. 

Thus, in 1778, England wanted security against the effects 
of her own misconduct and misfortunes in America; she 
granted some rights of property to the Irish Cathohcs, and 
the wanted security followed. 

Thus, in 1782, England wanted security against the prodi- 
gality and profligacy of her administration — against the com- 
bined navies of France, Spain, and Holland ; she conceded 
some further advantages to the Catholics, and she became safe 
and secure. 

Thus, in 1795, England wanted security against the proba- 
ble consequences of the disasters and treachery of the Prus- 
sians — the defeat of the Austrians, and especially against 
the revolutionary epidemic distemper which threatened the 
vitals of the constitution ; she conferred on the Catholics 
some portion of pohtical freedom, and the Catholics have re- 
compensed her, by affording her subsequent security. 

And thus has Emancipation been in all its stages the effect 
of the wants of England, but, at the same time, her resources 
in those wants. In her weakness and decay. Emancipation 
has given her health and strength ; it was always liitherto a 



4:6 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

remedy, and not in itself a disease ; it was, in short, her best 
protection and security. Away, then, with those idle, those 
absurd demands for control, and dominion over our mode of 
faith. 

Let Grattan learn the sentiments of the Irish people ; let 
him know that we are ready to give the security of our pro- 
perties and our Hves to the state ; but we will not, we cannot, 
grant away any part of our religion. Before the Union, no 
vetoes, no arrangements, no inquisitions over our prelates were 
required. 

If our Protestant fellow-countrymen did not ask them, why 
should the English suppose we can grant them to then- stupid 
caprice ? But we are ready to give them security ; we are 
ready to secure them from foreign foes, and against the possi- 
bihty of domestic dissension. 

Yes, the hour of your Emancipation is at hand ; you will, 
you must be Emancipated ; not by the operation of any force 
or violence, which are unnecessary, and would be illegal on 
your part, but by the repetition of your constitutional demands 
by petition, and stiU more by the pressure of circumstances, 
and the great progress of events. Yes, your Emancipation is 
certain, because England wants the assistance of all her peo- 
ple. The dream of dehvering the Continent from the domin- 
ion of Bonaparte has vanished. The idle romance of German 
liberty — who ever heard of German liberty? — is now a cheerless 
vision. The allied Kussian and Prussian armies may, perhaps, 
escape, but they have little prospect of victory. The Ameri- 
cans have avenged our outrages on their seamen, by quench- 
ing the meteor blaze of the British naval flag. The war with 
the world — England, alone, against the world — is in progress. 
"We shall owe to her good sense, what ought to be conceded by 
her generosity ; she cannot proceed without our aid ; she 
knows she can command that aid if she wiU but be just ; she 
can, for liberty, to which we are of right entitled, command 
the affections and the energies of the bravsst and finest peo- 
ple in the world ! 

Uncollect, too, that the financial distress of England accu- 
mulates. She owes, including the Irish debt, near a milhon of 
milhons. "Who is there so extravagant as to suppose, but that 



ON EEQUIRING SECUEITIES FEOM THE CATHOLICS. 47 

there must arrive a period at which it will become impossible 
to borrow money, or to pay more interest ? Our Irish debt 
has already exceeded, by nearly two-thirds, our means. "We 
spend sixteen millions annually, and we collect, in revenue, 
about five miUions. Our bank puts a paltry impression on 
three penny-worth of silver, and caUs it tenpence. In short, 
with taxes increasing, debts accumulating, revenue diminish- 
ing, trade expiring, paper currency depreciating — who is so 
very blind as not to perceive, that England does and must re- 
quire, the consolidation of all her people in one common cause, 
and in one common interest ? 

The plain path to safety — to security — ^lies before her. Let 
Irishmen be restored to their inherent rights, and she may 
laugh to scorn the shock of every tempest ; the arrangements 
which the abolition of the national debt may require will 
then be effectuated, without convulsion or disturbance ; and 
no foreign foe will dare to pollute the land of freemen and of 
brothers. 

They have, however, struck out another resource in Eng- 
land ; they have resolved, it is said, to resort to the protec- 
tion of Orange Lodges. That system which has been declared 
by judges from the bench to be illegal and criminal, and found 
by the experience of the people to be bigoted and bloody — the 
Orange system, which has marked its progress in blood, in 
murder, and in massacre — the Orange system, which has des- 
olated Ireland, and would have converted her into a sohtude, 
but for the interposing hand of CornwaUis — the Orange system 
with all its sanguinary horrors is, they say, to be adopted in 
England ! 

Its prominent patron, we are told, is Lord Kenyon or Lord 
Yarmouth ; the first an insane rehgionist of the Welsh Jum- 
per sect, who, bounding in the air, imagines' he can lay hold 
of a limb of the Deity, Hke Macbeth, snatching at the air- 
drawn dagger of his fancy ! He would be simply ridiculous, 
but for the mischievous mahgnity of his holy piety, which de- 
sires to convert Papists from their errors, through the instru- 
mentahty of daggers of steel. Lord Kenyon may enjoy his 
ample sinecures as he pleases, but his foUy should not goad to 
madness the people of Ireland. 



48 SELECT SPEECHES OF DAMIEL o'CONNELL. 

As to Lord Yarmouth, I need not, indeed I could not, de- 
scribe him ; and if I could, I would not disgust myself with 
the description ; but if Lord Kenyon or Lord Yarmouth 
have organized the Orange system, I boldly proclaim that he 
must have been bribed by the common enemy. Bigotry is not 
a gratuitous propensity. Giffard gets money for his calum- 
nies and impudence ; so does Duigenan. The English Orange 
patrons must be bribed by France ; let them appeal to their 
private lives to repel my accusation. Can that man repel it, 
whose life is devoted to the accumulation of wealth to be 
added to wealth, already excessive and enormous ? — who 
never was suspected of principle or honor? — whose finest 
feehngs were always at market for money — who was ready 
to wed disgrace with a rich dowry, and would have espoused 
infamy with a large portion? If such a wretch hves, let 
him become the leader of the Orange banditti. The patron 
is worthy of the institution — the institution is suited to the 
patron. 

You know full well that I do not exaggerate the horrors 
which the Orange system has produced, and must produce, if 
revived from authority, in this country. I have, in some of the 
hheling prints of London, read, under the guise of oj^posing 
adoption of the Orange system, the most unfounded praises of 
the conduct of the L'ish Orangemen. They were called loyal, 
and worthy, and constitutional. Let me hold them up in then* 
true light. The first authentic fact in their history occurs in 
1795. It is to be found in the address of Lord Gosford, to a 
meeting of the magistrates of the county of Armagh, con- 
vened by his lordship, as governor of that county, on the 28th 
of December, 1795. Allow me to read the following passage 
from that address : 

"Gentlemen — ^Having requested your attendance here this day, it be 
comes my duty to state the grounds upon which I thought it advisable 
to propose this meeting ; and at the same time to submit to your con- 
sideration a plan which occurs to me as most likely to check the enor- 
mities that have already brought disgrace upon this country, and may 
soon reduce it into deep distress. 

"It is no secret that a persecution, accompanied with all the 
circumstances of ferocious cruelty, which have in all ages distinguished 



ON REQUIRING SECURITIES FROM THE CATHOLICS. 49 

that dreadful calamity, is now raging in this country. Neither age 
nor sex, nor even acknowledged innocence, as to any guilt in the late 
disturbances, is sufficient to excite mercy, much less to afibrd protection. 

" The only crime which the wretched objects of this ruthless persecu- 
tion are charged with, is a crime, indeed, of easy proof ; it is simply a 
profession of the Eoman Catholic faith, or an intimate connection with 
a person professing this faith. A lawless banditti have constituted them- 
selves judges of this new species of delinquency, and the sentence they 
have denounced is equally concise and terrible. It is nothing less than 
a confiscatiou of all property, and an immediate banishment. It would 
be extremely painful, and surely unnecessary, to detail the horrors 
that are attendant on the execution of so rude and tremendous a pro- 
scription — one that certainly/ exceeds in the comparative number of 
those it consigns to ruin and misery, every example that ancient and 
modern history can supply; for where have we heard, or in what story of 
human cruelties have we read, of half the inhabitants of a populous 
country deprived, at one blow, of the means as well as the fruits of 
their industry, and driven, in the midst of an inclement season, to 
seek a shelter for themselves, and their helpless families, where chance 
may guide them ? 

" This is no exaggerated picture of the horrid scenes that are now act- 
ing in this country." , 

Here is the first fact in tlie history of the Orangemen. 
Thej commenced their course by a persecution with every 
circumstance of ferocious crulelty. This lawless banditti, as 
Lord Gosford called them, showed no mercy to age, nor sex, 
nor acknowledged innocence. And this is not the testimony 
of a man favorable to the rights of those persecuted Catholics ; 
he avows his intolerance in the very address of which I have 
read you a part ; and though shocked at these Orange enor- 
mities, he still exults in his hostihty to Emancipation. 

After this damning fact from the early history of the Or- 
angemen, who can think with patience on the revival or exten- 
sion of this murderous association ? It is not, it ought not, it 
cannot be endured, that such an association should be restored 
to its power of mischief by abandoned and unprincipled cour- 
tiers. But I have got in my possession a document which dem- 
onstrates the vulgar and lowly origin, as well as the traitorous 
and profligate purpose of this Orange society. It has been re- 
peatedly sworn to in judicial proceedings, that the original 
oath of an Orangeman was an oath to exterminate the Cathohcs. 



50 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

In some years after the society was formed, men of a higlier 
class of society became members of it, and being too well ed- 
ucated to endure the plain declaration to exterminate, they 
changed the form of the oath to its present shape, but care- 
fully retained all the persecuting spirit of the Armagh exter- 
minators. The document I allude to, was printed for the use of 
the Orange Lodges ; it was never intended for any eye but that 
of the initiated, and I owe it to something better than chance 
that I got a copy of it ; it was printed by WilHam M'Kenzie, 
printer to the Grand Orange Lodge, in 1810, and is entitled, 
" Eules and Regulations for the use of aU Orange Societies, 
revised and corrected by a Committee of the Grand Orange 
Lodge of Ireland, and adopted by the Grand Orange Lodge, 
January 10th, 1810." I can demonstrate from this document 
that the Orange is a vulgar, a profligate, and a treasonable as- 
sociation. To prove it treasonable, I read the following, which 
is given as the first of their secret articles : — " That we wiU 
bear true allegiance to his Majesty, his heirs and successors, 
so long as he or they support the Protestant ascendency." 

The meaning is obvious, the Orangeman wiU be loyal just 
so long as he pleases. The traitor puts a limit to his alle- 
giance, suited to what he shall fancy to be meant by the 
words " Protestarnt ascendency." If the legislature presumes 
to alter the law for the Irish Catholics as it did for the Han- 
overian CathoKcs, then is the Orangeman clearly discharged 
from his allegiance, and allowed, at the first convenient oppor- 
tunity, to raise a civU war ; and this is what is called a loyal 
association. Oh ! how different from the unconditional, the 
ample, the conscientious oath of allegiance of the Irish Cath- 
ohc ! I pass over the second secret article, as it contains 
nothing worthy of observation ; but from the third I shall at 
once demonstrate what pitiful and vulgar dogs the original 
Orangemen were. Mark the third secret article, I pray you — 
" That we will not see a brother offended for sixpence or one 
shilling, or more if convenient, which must be returned next 
meeting if possible." Such is the third of the secret Orange 
articles. I presume even Lord Yarmouth will go with them 
the full length of their HberaUty of sixpence or one shilhng, 
but further his convenience may prevent him. 



ON REQUIRING SECURITIES FROM THE CATHOLICS. 51 

The fourtli secret article is quite characteristic — " That we 
must not give the first assault to any person whatsoever, that 
may bring a brother into trouble." You perceive the limita- 
tion. They are entitled to give the first assault in all cases, 
but that in which it may not be quite prudent; they are 
restricted from commencing their career of aggression, unless 
they are, I presume, ten to one — ^unless they are armed and 
the Cathohcs disarmed — unless their superiority in numbers 
and preparation is marked and manifest. See the natural 
alliance of cowardice with cruelty. They are ready to assault 
you, when no brother of theirs can be injured ; but if there 
be danger of injury to one of their brotherhood, they are 
bound to restrain, for that time, their hatred of the Cathohcs, 
and to allow them to pass unattacked. This fourth article 
proves, better than a volume, the aggressive spirit of the insti- 
tution, and accounts for many a riot, and many a recent mur- 
der. The fifth secret article exhibits the rule of Orangemen, 
with respect to robbery. "5th. We are not to carry away 
money, goods, or anything, from any person whatever, except 
arms and ammunition, and those only from an enemy." The 
rule allows them to commit felony to this extent — namely, the 
arms and ammunition of any Cathohc, or enemy ; and I have 
heard of a Cathohc who was disarmed of some excellent sil- 
ver spoons, and a silver cup, by a detachment of this banditti. 
Yes, Lord Gosford was right, when he called them a lawless 
banditti; for here is such a regulation as could be framed 
only for those whose object was plunder — whose means were 
murder. The sixth and seventh secret articles relate to the 
attendance and enrolling of members; but the eighth is of 
great importance — it is this : — " 8th secret article — An Orange- 
man is to keep his brother's secrets as his own, unless in case 
of murder, treason and perjury, and that of his own free will." 
See what an abundant crop of crimes the Orangeman is 
bound to conceal for his brother Orangeman. KiUing a 
Papist may, in his eyes, be no murder, and he might be bound 
to conceal that ; but he is certainly bound to conceal all cases 
of riot, maiming, wounding, stabbing, theft, robbing, rape, 
house-breaking, house-burning, and every other human vil- 
lany, save murder, treason, and perjury. These are the good, 



52 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

the faithful, tlie loyal subjects. They may, without provoca- 
tion or excuse, attack and assault — give the first assault, mind, 
when they are certain no brother can be brought to trouble. 
They may feloniously and burglariously break into dweUings, 
and steal, take, and carry away whatever they please to call 
arms and ammunition. And, if the loyalty of a br®ther 
tempts him to go a little further, and to plunder any other 
articles, or to burn the house, or to violate female honor, his 
brother spectators of his crime are bound by their oaths to 
screen it forever from detection and justice. I know some 
men of better minds have been, in theu' horror of revolution- 
ary fury, seduced into these lodges, or have unthinkingly be- 
come members of them; but the spirit, the object, and the 
consequences of this murderous and plundering association, 
are not the less manifest. 

I do not calumniate them ; for I prove the history of their 
foundation and origin by the unimpeachable testimony of Yis- 
count Gosford, and I prove their principles by their own secret 
articles, the genuineness of which no Orangeman can or will 
deny. If it were denied, I have the means of proving it be- 
yond a doubt. And when such principles are avowed, when so 
much is acknowledged and printed, oh, it requires but Httle 
knowledge of human nature to ascertain the enormities which 
must appear in the practice of those who have confessed so 
much of the criminal nature of their principles. There is, how- 
ever, one consolation. It is to be found in their ninth 
secret article — " No Koman Cathohc can be admitted on any 
account." I thank them for it, I rejoice at it ; no Roman 
Cathohc deserves to be admitted. No Koman Catholic would 
desire to belong to a society permitting aggression and vio- 
lence, when safe and prudent, permitting robbery to a certain 
extent, and authorizing treason upon a given contingency. 
And now let me ask, what safety, what security can the min- 
ions of the court promise to themselves from the encourage- 
ment of tliis association ? They do want secmity, and from 
the Catholics they can readily have it ; and you, my friends, 
may want security, not from the open attacks of the Orange- 
men — for against those the law and your own courage will 
protect you ; but of their secret machmations you ought to 
be warned. They will endeavor, nay, I am most credibly as- 



ON REQUIEING SECURITIES FEOM THE CATHOLICS. 53 

sured, that at tliis moment their secret emissaries are endea- 
voring to seduce you into acts of sedition and treason, that 
they may betray and destroy you. Eecollect what happened 
little more than twelve months ago, when the Board detected 
and exposed a similar delusion in Dublin. Becollect the un- 
punished conspiracy which was discovered at Limerick ; un- 
punished and unprosecuted was the author. Eecollect the 
Mayor's Constable of Kilkenny, and he is still in office, though 
he administered an oath of secrecy, and gave money to his spy 
to treat the country people to liquor and seduce tliep to trea- 
son. I do most earnestly conjure you to be on your guard, no 
matter in what shape any man may approach, who suggests 
disloyalty to you — no matter of what rehgion he may affect to 
be — no matter what compassion he may express for your suf- 
ferings, what promises he may make ; believe me, that any man 
who may attempt to seduce you into any secret association or 
combination whatsoever, that suggests to you any violation of 
the law whatsoever, that dares to utter in your presence the lan- 
guage of sedition or of treason, depend upon it — take my word 
for it, and I am your sincere friend — that every such man is the 
hired emissary and the spy of your Orange enemies — that his 
real object is to betray you, to murder you under the forms of 
a judicial trial, and to ruin your country for your guilt. If, on 
the contrary, you continue at this trying moment peaceful, 
obedient and loyal ; if you avoid every secret association, and 
every incitement to turbulence ; if you persevere in your obe- 
dience to the laws, and in fidehty to the CrOwn and Constitution, 
your Emancipation is certain, and not distant, and your coun- 
try will be restored to you ; your natural friends and protec- 
tors will seek the redress of your grievances in and from parha- 
ment, and Ireland will be again free and happy. If you suf- 
fer yourself to be seduced by these Orange betrayers, the 
members of the Board will be bound to resist your crimes 
with their lives ; you will bring disgrace and ruin on our cause ; 
you will destroy yourself and your famUies, and perpetuate the 
degradation and disgrace of your native land. But my fears 
are vain. I know your good sense ; I rely on your fidehty ; you 
will continue to baffle your enemies ; you will continue faithful 
and peaceable ; and thus shall you preserve yourselves, promote 
your cause, and give security to the empire. 



54 SELECT SPEECHES OE DANIEL O'CONNELL. 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OE JOHN MAGEE, JULY 27, 

1813. 



Mk. Magee was prosecuted for a libel on tlie Duke of Eiclimond, 
in the Dublin Evening Journal, of whicli he was the proprietor. 
The case was opened by Mr. Kemmis, followed by Attorney-Gen- 
eral Saurin. Mr. O'Connell's reply was as follows : 

I consented to the adjournment yesterday, gentlemen of the 
jury, from this impulse of nature which compels us to post- 
pone pain ; it is, indeed, painful to me to address you ; it is a 
cheerless, a hopeless task to address you — a task which would 
require all the animation and interest to be derived from the 
working of a mind fully fraught with the resentment and dis- 
gust created in mine yesterday( by that farrago of helpless ab- 
surdity Vith which Mr. Attorney-General regaled you. 

But i am now not sorry for the delay. Whatever I may have 
lost in vivacity, I trust I shall compensate for in discretion. 
That which yesterday excited my anger, now appears to me to 
be an object of pity ; and that which then aroused my indig- 
nation, now only moves to contempt. I can now address you 
with feelings softened, and, I trust, subdued ; and I do, from 
my soul, declare, that I now cherish no other sensations than 
those which enable me to bestow on the Attorney-General, and 
on his discourse, pure and unmixed compassion. 

It was a discourse in which you could not discover either 
order, or method, or eloquence ; it contained very httle logic, 
and no poetry at all ; violent and virulent, it was a confused 
and disjointed tissue of bigotry, amalgamated with congenial 
vulgarity. He accused my client of using Billingsgate, and 
he accused him of it in language suited exclusively for that 
meridian. He descended even to the calling of names : he 
called this young gentleman a "malefactor," a " Jacobin," and 
a " ru£&an," gentlemen of the jury ; he called him " abomina- 
ble," and " seditious," and "revolutionary," and "infamous," 
and a " ruffian" again, gentlemen of the jmy ; he called him a 
" brothel keeper," a " pander," " a kind of bawd in breeches," 
and a " ruffian" a third time, gentlemen of the jury. 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 55 

I cannot repress my astonishment, how Mr. Attorney-Gen- 
eral could have preserved this dialect in its native purity ; he 
has been now for nearly thirty years in the class of polished 
society ; he has, for some years, mixed among the highest or- 
ders in the state ; he has had the honor to belong for thirty 
years to the first profession in the world — to the only profes- 
sion, with the single exception, perhaps, of the military, to 
which a high-minded gentleman could condescend to belong — 
the Irish bar. To that bar, at which he has seen and heard a 
Burgh and a Duquery ; at which he must have hstened to a 
Burston, a Ponsonby, and a Curran ; to a bar which still con- 
tains a Plunket, a Ball, and despite of politics, I will add, a 
Bushe, With this galaxy of glory, flinging their light around 
him, how can he alone have remained in darkness ? How has 
it happened, that the twihght murkiness of his soul has not 
been illumined with a single ray shot from their lustre ? De- 
void of taste and of genius, how can he have had memory 
enough to preserve this original vulgarity ? He is, indeed, an 
object of compassion, and, from my inmost soul, I bestow on 
him my forgiveness, and my bounteous pity. 

But not for him alone should compassion be felt. Recol- 
lect, that upon his advice — that with him, as the prime mover 
and instigator — those rash, and silly, and irritating meas- 
ures, of the last five years which have afflicted and distracted 
this long-sufjfering country have originated — with him they 
have all originated. Is there not then compassion due to the 
millions, whose destinies are made to depend upon his coun- 
sel ? Is there no pity to those who, like me, must know that 
the liberties of the tenderest pledges of their affections, and 
of that which is dearer still, of their country, depends on this 
man's advice? 

Yet let not pity for us be immixed ; he has afforded the 
consolation of hope ; his harangue has been heard ; it will be 
reported — I trust faithfully reported ; and if it be but read in 
England, we may venture to hope that there may remain just 
so much good sense in England as to induce the conviction of 
the folly and the danger of conducting the government of a 
brave and long-endming people by the counsels of so taste- 
less and talentless an adviser. 



56 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

See what an imitative animal man is ! The sound of ruf- 
fian — ruffian — ruffian, had scarcely died on the Attorney-Gen- 
eral's lips, when you find the word honored with all the per- 
manency of print, in one of his pensioned and well-paid, but 
ill-read newspapers. Here is the first line in the Dublin 
Journal of this day: — "The ruffian who writes for the Free- 
man's Journal." Here is an apt scholar — he profits weU of 
the Attorney-General's tuition. The pupil is worthy of the 
master — the master is just suited to the pupil. 

I now dismiss the style and measure of the Attorney-Gene- 
ral's discom-se, and I require your attention to its matter, 
that matter I must divide, although with him there was no 
division, into two unequal portions. The first, as it was by 
far the greater portion of his discourse, shall be that which 
was altogether inapplicable to the purposes of this prosecu- 
tion. The second, and infinitely the smaller portion of his 
speech, is that which related to the subject matter of the 
indictment which you are to try. He has touched upon and 
disfigured a great variety of topics. I shall follow him at my 
good leisure through them. He has invited me to a wide 
field of discussion. I accept his challenge with alacrity and 
Vfith pleasure. 

This extraneous part of his discourse, which I mean first 
to discuss, was distinguished by two leading features. The 
first, consisted of a dull and reproving sermon, with which he 
treated my colleagues and myself, for the manner in which we 
thought fit to conduct this defence. He talked of the melan- 
choly exhibition of four hours wasted, as he said, in frivolous 
debate, and he obscurely hinted at something hke incorrect- 
ness of professional conduct. He has not ventured to speak 
out, but I will. I shall say nothing for myself ; but for my 
colleagues — my inferiors in professional standing, but infinitely 
my superiors in every talent and in every acquirement — my 
colleagues, whom I boast as my friends, not in the routine 
language of the bar, but in the sincerity of my esteem and 
affection ; for my learned and upright colleagues, I treat the 
unfounded insinuation with the most contemptuous scorn ! 

All I shall expose is the utter inattention of the fact, which, 
in small things as in great, seems to mark the Attorney-Gen- 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 57 

eral's career. He talks of four hours. Why, it was past one 
before the last of jou were digged together by the Sheriff, and 
the Attorney-General rose to address you before three. How 
he could contrive to squeeze four hours into that interval, is for 
him to explain ; nor should I notice it, but that it is the par- 
ticular prerogative of dullness to be accurate in the detail of 
minor facts, so that the Attorney-General is without an ex- 
cuse, when he departs from them, and when for four hours 
you have had not quite two. Take this also with you, that we 
assert our uncontrollable right to employ them as we have done ; 
and as to his advice, we neither respect, nor will we receive 
it ; but we can afford cheerfully to pardon the vain presump- 
tion that made him offer us counsel. 

For the rest, he may be assured that we will never imitate 
his example. We wiU never volunteer to mingle our pohtics, 
whatever they may be, with our forensic duties. I made this 
the rigid rule of my professional conduct ; and if I shall ap- 
pear to depart from this rule now, I bid you recollect that I 
am compelled to foUow the Attorney-Gendral into grounds 
which, if he had been wise, he would have avoided. 

Yes ; I am compelled to follow him into the discussion of 
his conduct toward the Catholics. He has poured out the full 
vial of his own praise on that conduct — praise in which, I can 
safely assure him, he has not a single unpaid rival. It is a 
topic upon which no unbribed man, except himself, dwells. I 
admit the disinterestedness with which he praises himself, and 
I do not envy him his delight, but he ought to know, if he sees 
or hears a word of that kind from any other man, that that 
man receives or expects compensation for his task, and reaUy 
deserves money for his labor and invention. 

My lord, upon the CathoHc subject, I commence with one 
assertion of the Attorney-General, which I trust I misunder- 
stood. He talked, as I collected him, of the Catholics having 
imbibed principles of a seditious, treasonable, and revolutionary 
nature ! He seemed to me, most distinctly to charge us with 
treason ! There is no relying on his words for his meaning — 
I know there is not. On a former occasion, I took down a re- 
petition of this charge full seventeen times on my brief, and 
yet, afterwards, it turned out that he never intended to make 



58 SELECT SPEECHES OE DAKEEL O'CONNELL. 

any such charge ; that he forgot he had ever used those words, 
and he disclaimed the idea they naturally convey. It is clear, 
therefore, that upon tliis subject he knows not what he says ; 
and that these phrases are the mere flowers of his rhetoric, 
but quite innocent of any meaning ! 

Upon this account I pass him by, I go beyond him, and I 
content myself with proclaiming those charges, whosoever may 
make them, to be false and base calumnies ! It is impossible 
to refute such charges in the language of dignity or temper. 
But if any man dares to charge the Catholic body, or the 
Catholic Board, or any individuals of that Board with sedition 
or treason, I do here, I shall always in this court, in the city, 
in the field, brand him as an infamous and profligate liar ! 

Pardon the phrase, but there is no other suitable to the oc- 
casion. But he is a profligate liar who so asserts, because he 
must know that the whole tenor of our conduct confutes the 
assertion. What is it we seek ? 

Chief Justice. — What, Mr. O'Connell, can this have to do 
with the question which the jury are to try ? 

Me. O'Connell. — You heard the Attorney-General traduce 
and calumniate us — you heard him with patience and with 
temper — listen now to our vindication ! 

I ask, what is it we seek ? What is it we incessantly and, if 
you please, clamorously petition for ? Why, to be allowed to 
partake of the advantages of the constitution. We are ear- 
nestly anxious to share the benefits of the constitution. We 
look to the participation in the constitution as our greatest po- 
htical blessing. If we desired to destroy it, would we seek to 
share it ? If we wished to overturn it, would we exert our- 
selves through calumny, and in peril, to obtain a portion of 
its blessings ? Strange, inconsistent voice of calumny ! You 
charge us with intemperance in our exertions for a participa- 
tion in the constitution, and you charge us at the same time, 
almost in the same sentence, with a design to overturn the con- 
stitution. The dupes of your hypocrisy may believe you; 
but base calumniators, you do not, you cannot believe your- 
selves ! 

The Attorney-General — " this wisest and best of men," as his 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 59 

colleague, the Solicifcor-General, called liim in his presence — 
the Attorney-General nest boasted of his triumph over Pope 
and Popery — " I put down the Catholic Committee ; I wiU put 
dowi^ at my good time, the Catholic Board." This boast is 
partly historical, partly prophecy. He was wrong in his his- 
tory — he is quite mistaken in his prophecy. He did not put 
down the Catholic Committee — we gave up that name the 
moment that this sapient Attorney-General's polemica-legal 
controversy dwindled into a mere dispute about words. He 
told us that in the English language " pretence " means " pur- 
pose ;" had it been French and not English, we might have 
been inclined to respect his judgment, but in point of EngHsh 
we venture to differ with him ; we told him " purpose," good 
Mr. Attorney-General, is just the reverse of " pretence." The 
quarrel grew warm and animated : we appealed to common 
sense, to the grammar and to the dictionary ; common sense, 
grammar, and the dictionary, decided in our favor. He brought 
his appeal to this court, your lordship, and your brethren 
unanimously decided that in point of law — mark, mark, gen- 
tlemen of the jury, the sublime wisdom of the law — the 
court decided that, in point of law, "pretence" does mean 
"purpose !" 

Fully contented with this very reasonable and more satis- 
factory decision, there stiU remained a matter of fact between 
us : the Attorney-General charged us with being representa- 
tives ; we denied all representation. He had two witnesses to 
prove the fact for him ; they swore to it one way at one trial, 
and directly the other way at the next. An honorable, intelli- 
gent, and enlightened jury disbelieved those witnesses at the 
first trial — matters were better managed at the second trial — 
the jury were better arranged. I speak delicately, gentle- 
men ; the jury were better arranged, as the witnesses were 
better informed ; and, accordingly, there was one verdict for us 
on the representative question, and one verdict against u.s. 

You know the jury that found for vis ; you know that it was 
Sir Charles Saxton's Castle-list jury that found against us. 
Well, the consequence was, that, thus encouraged, Mr. Attor- 
ney-General proceeded to force. We abhorred tumult, and 
were weary of litigation ; we new-modelled the agents and 



60 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

managers of the Catholic petitions ; we formed an assembly, 
respecting which there could not be a shadow of pretext for 
calling it a representative body. We disclaim representation ; 
and we rendered it impossible, even for the virulence of the 
most mahgnant law-officer living, to employ the Convention 
Act against us — that, even upon the Attorney- General's own 
construction, requires representation as an ingredient in the 
offence it prohibits. He cannot possibly call us represen- 
tatives ; we are individual servants of the public, whose busi- 
ness we do gratuitously but zealously. Our cause has ad- 
vanced even from his persecution — and this he calls putting 
down the Cathohc Committee ! 

Next, he glorifies himself in his prospect of putting down the 
Catholic Board. For the present, he, indeed, tells you, that 
much as he hates the Papists, it is unnecessary for him to crush 
our Board, because we injure our own cause so much. He 
says that we are very criminal, but we are so foohsh that our 
folly serves as a compensation for our wickedness. We are 
very wicked and very mischievous, but then we are such fool- 
ish little criminals, that we deserve his indulgence. Thus he 
tolerates offences because of their being committed silhly ; and 
indeed, we give him so much pleasure and gratification by the 
injury we do our own cause, that he is spared the superfluous 
labor of impeding our petition by his prosecutions, fines, or 
imprisonments. 

He expresses the very idea of the Boman Domitian, of 
whom some of you possibly may have read ; he amused his 
days in tortiuing men — his evenings he relaxed in the humble 
cruelty of impaling flies. A courtier caught a fly for his im- 
perial amusement — "Fool," said the emperor, "fool, to give 
thyself the trouble of torturing an animal that was about to 
burn itself to death in the candle !" Such is the spirit of the 
Attorney-General's commentary on our Board. Oh, rare At- 
torney-General ! — Oh, best and wisest of men ! 

But to be serious. Let me pledge myself to you that he im- 
poses on you, when he threatens to crush the Catholic Board. 
Illegal violence may do it — force may effectuate it ; but your 
hopes and his will be defeated, if he attempts it by any course 
of law. I am, if not a lawyer, at least, a barrister. On this 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 61 

subject I ought to know sometliing, and I do not hesitate to 
contradict the Attorney-General on this point, and to proclaim 
to you and to the country that the Catholic Board is perfectly 
a legal assembly — that it not only does not violate the law, 
but that it is entitled to the protection of the law, and in the 
very proudest tone of firmness, I hurl defiance at the Attorney- 
General ! 

I defy him to allege a law or a statute, or even a proclama- 
tion that is violated by the Cathohc Board. No, gentlemen, 
no ; his religious prejudices — if the absence of every charity 
can be called anything religious — his religious prejudices real- 
ly obscure his reason, his bigoted intolerance has totally 
darkened his understanding, and he mistakes the plainest 
facts and misquotes the clearest law, in the ardor and vehe- 
mence of his rancor. I disclaim his moderation — I scorn his 
forbearance — I tell him he knows not the law if he thinks as 
he says ; and if he thinks so, I tell him to his beard, that he 
is not honest in not having sooner prosecuted us, and I 
challenge him to that prosecution. 

It is strange — ic is melancholy, to reflect on the miserable 
and mistaken pride that must inflate him to talk as he does of 
the Catholic Board. The Catholic Board is com, osed of 
men — I include not myself — of course, I always except my- 
self — every way his superiors, in birth, in fortune, in talents, 
in rank. What! is he to talk of the Cathohc Board lightly? 
At their head is the Earl of Eingal, a nobleman whose exalted 
rank stoops beneath the superior station of his virtues — whom 
even the venal minions of power must respect. We are en- 
gaged, patiently and perseveringly engaged, in a struggle 
through the open channels of the constitution for our hberties. 
The son of the ancient earl whom I have mention-d cannot 
in his native land attain any honorable distinction of the 
state, and yet Mr. Attorney-General knows that they are open 
to every son of every bigoted and intemperate stranger that 
may settle amongst us. 

But this system cannot last ; he may insult, he may calum- 
niate, he may prosecute ; but the Catholic cause is on its ma- 
jestic march ; its progress is rapid and obvious ; it is cheered 
in its advance, and aided by all that is dignified and dispas- 



62 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

sionate — ^by everytliing tliat is patriotic — ^by all the honor, all 
the integrity of the empire ; and its success is just as certain 
as the return of to-morrow's sun, and the close of to-morrow's 
eve. 

" We will — we must soon be emancipated, in despite of the 
Attorney-General, aided as he is by his august allies, the 
aldermen of Skinner's Alley. In despite of the Attorney- 
General and the aldermen of Skinner's Alley, our emancipa- 
tion is certain, and not distant. 

I have no difficulty in perceiving the motive of the Attor- 
ney-General, in devoting so much of his medley oration to the 
Cathohc question, and to the expression of his bitter hatred to 
us, and of his determination to ruin our hopes. It had, to be 
sm"e, no connection with the cause, but it had a direct and na- 
tural connection with you. He has been, all his life, reckoned 
a man of consummate cunning and dexterity ; and whilst one 
wonders that he has so much exposed himseK upon those 
prosecutions, and accounts for it by the proverbial blindness of 
religious zeal, it is still easy to discover much of his native 
cunning and dexterity. Gentlemen, he thinks he knows his 
men — ^lie knows you ; many of you signed the no-Popery peti- 
tion ; he heard one of you boast of it ; he knows you would 
not have been summoned on this jury, if you had entertained 
liberal sentiments ; he knows all this, and, therefore it is that 
he, with the artifice and cunning of an experienced nisi prius 
advocate, endeavors to win your confidence, and command 
your affections by the display of his congenial ilhberahty and 
bigotry. 

You are all, of course, Protestants; see what a compli- 
ment he pays to your religion and his own, when he endeavors 
thus to procure a verdict on your oaths ; when he endeavors to 
seduce you to what, if you were so seduced, would be perjury, 
by indulging your prejudices, and flattering you by the coinci- 
dence of his sentiments and wishes. Will he succeed, gentle- 
men? Will you allow him to draw you into a perjury out of 
zeal for yom' rehgion ? And will you violate the pledge you 
have given to your God to do justice, in order to gratify your 
anxiety for the ascendency of what you beheve to be his 
church? Gentlemen, reflect on the strange and monstrous 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 63 

inconsistency of tins conduct, and do not commit, if you can 
avoid it, tlie pious crime of violating your solemn oaths, in aid 
of the pious designs of the Attorney-General against Popery. 

Oh, gentlemen ! it is not in any lightness of heart I thus 
address you — ^it is rather in bitterness and sorrow ; you did not 
expect flattery from me, and my client was little disposed to 
ofi'er it to you ; besides, of what avail would it be to flatter, if 
you came here pre-determined, and it is too plain that you are 
not selected for this jury from any notion of your impar- 
tiality ? 

But when I talk to you of your oaths and of your religion 
I would full fain I could impress you with a respect for both 
the one and the other. I, who do not flatter, tell you, that 
though I do not join with you in behef, I have the most un- 
feigned respect for the form of Christian faith which you pro- 
fess. "Would that its substance, not its forms and temporal 
advantages, were deeply impressed on your minds ! then 
should I not address you in the cheerless and hopeless de- 
spondency that crowds on my mind, and drives me to taunt 
you with the air of ridicule I do. Gentlemen, I sincerely 
respect and venerate your religion, but I despise and I now 
apprehend your prejudices, in the same proportion as the At- 
torney-General has cultivated them. In plain truth, every 
religion is good — every rehgion is true to him who, in his due 
caution and conscience, believes it. There is but one bad 
rehgion, that of a man who professes a faith which he does 
not believe ; but the good religion may be, and often is, cor- 
rupted by the wretched and wicked prejudices which admit a 
difference of opinion as a cause of hatred. 

The Attorney-General, defective in argument, weak in liis 
cause, has artfully roused your prejudices at his side. I have, 
on the contrary, met your prejudices boldly. If your verdict 
shall be for me, you will be certain that it has been produced 
by nothing but unwilling conviction resulting from sober and 
satisfied judgment. If your verdict be bestowed upon the ar- 
tifices of the Attorney-General, you may happen to be right ; 
but do you not see the danger of its being produced by an ad- 
mixture of passion and prejudice with your reason? How 
difficult is it to separate prejudice from reason, when they run 



64 SELECT SPEECHES OF DAMEEL o'CONNELL. 

in tlie same direction. If you be men of conscience, tlien I 
call on you to listen to me, that your consciences may be safe, 
and your reason alone be the guardian of your oath, and the 
sole monitor of your decision. 

I now bring you to the immediate subject of this indict- 
ment. Mr. Magee is charged with publishing a libel in his 
paper called the Dubhn Evening Post. His lordship has de- 
cided that there is legal proof of the publication, and I would 
be sorry you thought of acquitting Mr. Magee under the pre- 
tence of not beheving that evidence. I wiU not, therefore, 
trouble you on that part of the case ; I wiU tell you, gentle- 
men, presently, what this publication is ; but suffer me first to 
inform you what it is not — for this I consider to be very im- 
portant to the strong, and, in truth, triumphant defence which 
my client has to this indictment. 

Gentlemen, this is not a hbel on Charles Lennox, Duke of 
Ptichmond, in his private or individual capacity. It does not 
interfere with the privacy of his domestic hfe. It is free from 
any reproach upon his domestic habits or conduct ; it is per- 
fectly pure from any attempt to traduce his personal honor 
or integrity. Towards the man, there is not the least taint of 
malignity ; nay, the thing is still stronger. Of Charles Duke 
of Eichmond, personally, and as disconnected with the admin- 
istration of pubhc affairs, it speaks in terms of civility and 
even respect. It contains this passage, which I read from the 
indictment : — 

" Had he remained what he first came over, or what he afterwards 
professed to be, he would have retained his reputation for honest open 
hostiUty, defending his poUtieal principles with firmness, laerhaps with 
warmth, but without rancor ; the supporter and not the tool of an ad- 
ministration ; a mistaken politician, perhaps, but an honorable man and 
a respectable soldier," 

The Duke is here in this libel, my lords — in this libel, gen- 
tlemen of the jury, the Duke of Eichmond is called an honor- 
able man and a respectable soldier ! Could more flattering 
expressions be invented ? Has the most mercenary press that 
ever yet existed, the mercenary press of this metropohs, con^- 
tained in return for aU the money it has received, anj 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 65 

praise whicli ought to be so pleasing — "an honorable 
man and a respectable soldier?" I do, therefore, beg of 
you, gentlemen, as you value your honesty, to carry with 
you in your distinct recollection, this fact, that whatever of 
evil this publication may contain, it does not involve any re- 
proach against the Duke of Bichmond, in any other than in 
his public and official character. 

I have, gentlemen, next to require you to take notice, that 
this pubhcation is not indicted as a seditious libel. The word 
seditious is, indeed, used as a kind of make-weight in the in- 
troductory part of the indictment. But mark, and recollect, 
that this is not an indictment for sedition. It is not, then, for 
private slander, nor for any offence against the constitution, 
that Mr. Magee now stands arraigned before you. 

In the third place, gentlemen, there is this singular feature 
in this case, namely — that this hbel, as the prosecutor calls it, 
is not charged in this indictment to be " false." 

The indictment has this singular difference- from any other 
I have ever seen, that the- assertions of the publications are 
not even stated to be false. 

They have not had the courtesy to you, to state upon 
record, that these charges, such as they are, were contrary to 
the truth. This I believe to be the first instance in which the 
allegation of falsehood has been omitted. To what is this 
omission to be attributed ? Is it that an experiment is to be 
made, how much further the doctrine of the criminahty of 
truth can be drawn? Does the prosecutor wish to make 
another bad precedent ? or is it in contempt of any dis- 
tinction between truth and falsehood, that this charge is 
thus framed ? or does he fear that you would scruple to con- 
vict, if the indictment charged that to be false, which you all 
know to be true ? 

However that may be, I will have you to remember, that 
you are now to pronounce upon a publication, the truth of 
which is not controverted. Attend to the case, and you will 
find you are not to try Mr. Magee for sedition which may 
endanger the state, or for private defamation which may press 
sorely upon the heart, and blast the prospects of a private 
family ; and that the subject matter for your decision is not 
characterized as false, or described as untrue. 



66 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

Sucli are the circumstances whicli accompany this pubKca- 
tion, on which you are to pronounce a verdict of guilt or inno- 
cence. The case is with you ; it belongs to you exclusively to 
decide it. His lordship may advise, but he cannot control your 
decision, and it belongs to you alone to say whether or not, 
upon the entire matter, you conceive it to be evidence of guilt, 
and deserving of punishment. The statute law gives or recog- 
nizes this your right, and, therefore, imposes this on you as 
your duty. The legislative has precluded any lawyer from be- 
ing able to dictate to you. The Sohcitor-General cannot now 
venture to promulgate the slavish doctrine which he addressed 
to Doctor Sheridan's jury, when he told them, " not to presume 
to differ from the Court in matter of law." The law and the 
fact are here the same, namely — the guilty or innocent design 
of the publication. 

Indeed, in any criminal case, the doctrine of the Sohcitor- 
General is intolerable. I enter my solemn protest against it. 
The verdict which is required from the jury in any criminal 
case has nothing special in it — it is not the finding of the fact 
in the affirmative or negative — it is not, as in Scotland, that 
the charge is proved or not proved. No ; the jury is to say 
whether the prisoner be guilty or not ; and could a juror find a 
true verdict, who declared a man guilty upon evidence of some 
act, perhaps praiseworthy, but clearly void of e^dl design or 
bad consequences ? 

I do, therefore, deny the doctrine of the learned gentleman ; 
it is not constitutional, and it would be frightful if it were. 
No judge can dictate to a jury — no jury ought to allow itseK 
to be dictated to. 

If the Solicitor-General's doctrine were estabhshed, see 
what oppressive consequences might result. At some future 
period, some man may attain the first place on the bench, by 
the reputation which is so easily acquired by a certain degree 
of church-wardening piety, added to a great gravity, and mai- 
denly decorum of manners. Such a man may reach the bench 
— for I am putting an imaginary case — he may be a man with- 
out passions, and therefore without vices ; he may, my lord, 
be a man superfluously rich, and therefore, not to be bribed 
with money, but rendered partial by his bigotry, and 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 67 

corrupted by his prejudices ; such a man, inflated by flat- 
tery, and bloated in his dignity, may hereafter use that 
character for sanctity which has served to promote him, as a 
sword, to hew down the strugghng hberties of his country ; 
such a judge may interfere before trial ! and at the trial be a 
partisan ! 

Gentlemen, should an honest jury — could an honest jury (if 
an honest jury were again found) listen with safety to the dic- 
tates of such a judge ? I repeat it, therefore, that the Sohci- 
tor-General is mistaken — that the law does not, and cannot, 
require such a submission as he preached ; and at all events, 
gentlemen, it cannot be controverted, that in the present in- 
stance, that of an alleged Hbel, the decision of all law and fact 
belongs to you. 

I am then warranted in directing to you some observations 
on the law of Hbel, and in. doing so, I disclaim any apology 
for the consumption of the time necessary for my purpose. 
Gentlemen, my intention is to lay before you a short and rapid 
view of the causes which have introduced into courts the mon- 
strous assertion — that truth is crime ! 

It is to be deeply lamented, that the art of printing was un- 
known at the earher periods of our history. If, at the time 
the barons wrung the simple but subhme charter of liberty 
from a timid, perfldious sovereign, from a violator of his 
word, from a man covered with disgrace, and sunk in infamy 
• — if at the time when that charter was conflrmed and re- 
newed, the press had existed, it would, I think, have been the 
first care of those friends of freedom to have established a 
principle of liberty for it to rest upon, which might resist every 
future assault. Their simple and unsophisticated understand- 
ings could never be brought to comprehend the legal subtle- 
ties by which it is now argued, that falsehood is useful and in- 
nocent, and truth, the emanation and type of heaven, a crime. 
They would have cut with their swords the cobweb links of so- 
phistry in which truth is entangled ; and they would have 
rendered it impossible to re-estabhsh this injustice without 
violating the principle of the constitution. 

But in the ignorance of the blessing of a free press, they 
could not have provided for its security. There remains, how- 



68 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

ever, an expression of their sentiments, on onr statute books, 
The ancient parliament did pass a law against the spreaders 
of false rumors. This law proves two things — first, that be- 
fore this statute, it was not considered a crime in law to spread 
even a false rumor, otherwise the statute would have been un- 
necessary ; and secondly, that in their notion of crime, false- 
hood was a necessary ingredient. But here I have to remark 
upon, and regret the strange propensity of judges, to construe 
the law in favor of tyranny, and against liberty ; for servile 
and corrupt judges soon decided, that upon the construction 
of this law, it was immaterial whether the rumors were true or 
false, and that a law made to punish false rumors, was equally 
apphcable to the true. 

This, gentlemen, is called construction ; it is just that which 
in more recent times, and of inevitable consequence, from 
purer motives, has converted "pretence" into "purpose." 

When the art of printing was invented, its value to every 
sufferer — its terror to every oppressor was soon obvious, and 
means were speedily adopted to prevent its salutary effects. 
The Star-Chamber — the odious Star-Chamber was either cre- 
ated, or, at least, enlarged and brought into activity. Its pro- 
ceedings were arbitrary — ^its decisions were oppressive, and 
injustice and tyranny were formed into a system. To describe 
it to you in one sentence, it was a prematurely packed jury. 
Perhaps that description does not shock you much. Let me 
report one of its decisions which will, I think, make its hor- 
rors more sensible to you — it is a ludicrous as well as a mel- 
ancholy instance. 

A tradesman — a ruffian, I presume, he was styled — in an 
altercation with a nobleman's servant, called the swan, which 
was worn on the servant's arm for a badge, a goose. For this 
offence — the calhng the nobleman's badge of a swan a goose, 
he was brought before the Star-Chamber — ^he was, of course, 
convicted ; he lost, as I recollect, one of his ears on the pil- 
lory — was sentenced to two years' imprisonment, and a fine of 
.£500 ; and all tliis to teach him to distinguish swans from geese. 

I now ask you, to what is it you tradesmen and merchants 
are indebted for the safety and respect you can enjoy in 
society ? What is it which has rescued you from the slavery 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 69 

in whicli persons wIig are engaged in trade were lield by tlie 
iron barons of former days ? I will teU you ; it is the light, 
the reason, and the Hberty which have been created, and will, 
in despite of every opposition, be perpetuated by the exertion 
of the press. 

Gentlemen, the Star-Chamber was particularly vigUant over 
the infant struggles of the press. A code of laws became 
necessary to govern the new enemy to prejudice and oppres- 
sion — the Press. The Star-Chamber adopted, for this pur- 
pose, the civil law, as it is called — the law of Eome — not the 
law at the periods of her Hberty and her glory, but the law 
which was promulgated when she feU into slavery and dis- 
grace, and recognized this principle, that the will of the prince 
was the rule of the law. The civil law was adopted by the 
Star-Chamber as its guide in proceedings against, and in pun- 
ishing libellers ; biit, unfortunately, only part of it was adopted, 
and that, of course, was the part least favorable to freedom. 
So much of the civil law as assisted to discover the concealed 
libeller, and to punish him when discovered, was carefully 
selected ; but the civil law allowed truth to be a defence, and 
that part was carefully rejected. 

The Star-Chamber was soon after abolished. It was sup- 
pressed by the hatred and vengeance of an outraged people, 
and it has since, and until our days, lived only in the recollec- 
tion of abhorrence and contempt. But we have fallen upon bad 
days and evil times ; and in our days we have seen a lawyer, 
long of the prostrate and degraded bar of England, presume 
to suggest a high eulogium on the Star-Chamber, and regret 
its downfall ; and he has done this in a book dedicated, by 
permission, to Lord Ellenborough. This is, perhaps, an omi- 
nous circumstance ; and as Star-Chamber punishments have 
been revived — as two years of imprisonment has become f ami- 
liar, I know not how soon the useless lumber of even well- 
selected juries may be abolished, and a new Star-Chamber 
created. 

From the Star-Chamber, gentlemen, the prevention and 
punishment of hbels descended to the courts of common law, 
and with the power they seem to have inherited much of the 
spirit of that tribunal. Servility at the bar, and profligacy on 



70 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

the bench, have not been wanting to aid every construction un- 
favorable to freedom, and at length it is taken as granted and 
as clear law, that truth or falsehood are quite immaterial cir- 
cumstances, constituting no part of either guilt or innocence. 

I would wish to examine this revolting doctrine, and, in 
doing so, I am proud to tell you, that it has no other founda- 
tion than in the oft-repeated assertions of lawyers and judges. 
Its authority depends on what are technically called the dicta 
of the judges and writers, and not upon solemn or regular 
adjudications on the point. One servile lawyer has repeated 
this doctrine, from time to time, after another — and one over- 
bearing judge has re-echoed the assertion of a time-serving 
predecessor, and the pubHc have, at length, submitted. 

I do, therefore, feel, not only gratified in having the occa- 
sion, but bound to express my opinion upon the real law of 
this subject. I know that opinion is but of httle weight. I 
have no professional rank, or station, or talents to give it im- 
portance, but it is an honest and conscientious opinion, and it 
is this — that in the discussion of pubhc subjects, and of the 
administration of pubhc men, truth is a duty and not a crime. 

Tou can, at least, understand my description of the liberty 
of the press. That of the Attorney-General is as unintelligi- 
ble as contradictory. He tells you, in a very odd and quaint 
phrase, that the hberty of the press consists in there being no 
previous restraint upon the tongue or the pen. How any pre- 
vious restraint could be imposed on the tongue it is for this 
wisest of men to tell you, unless, indeed, he resorts to Dr. 
Lad's prescription with respect to the toothache eradication. 
Neither can the absence of previous restraint constitute a free 
press, unless, indeed, it shall be distinctly ascertained, and 
clearly defined, what shall be subsequently called a crime. If 
the crime of libel be undefined, or uncertain, or capricious, 
then, instead of the absence of restraint before pubHcation 
being an advantage, it is an injury; instead of its being a bless- 
ing, it is a curse — it is nothing more than a pitfall and snare 
for the unwaiy. This hberty of the press is only an oppor- 
tunity and a temptation offered by the law to the commis- 
sion of crime — it is a trap laid to catch men for punish- 
ment — it is not the hberty of discussing truth or discoun- 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 71 

tenancing oppression, but a mode of rearing up victims for 
prosecution, and of seducing men into imprisonment. 

Yet, can any gentleman concerned for the Crown give me a 
definition of the crime of libel ? Is it not uncertain and un- 
defined ; and, in truth, is it not, at this moment, quite subject 
to the caprice and whim of the judge and of the jury ? Is the 
Attorney -General — is the Sohcitor'-General disposed to say 
otherwise? If he do, he must contradict his own doctrine, 
and adopt mine. 

But no, gentlemen, they must leave you in uncertainty and 
doubt, and ask you to give a verdict, on your oath, without 
furnishing you with any rational materials to judge whether 
you be right or wrong. Indeed, to such a wild extent of ca- 
price has Lord EUenborough carried the doctrine of crime in 
libel, that he appears to have gravely ruled, that it was a crime 
to call one lord " a stout-built, special pleader," although, in 
point of fact, that lord was stout-built, and had been very 
many years a special pleader. And that it was a crime to call 
another lord, " a sheep-feeder from Cambridgeshire," although 
that lord w^as right glad to have a few sheep in that county. 
These are the extravagant vagaries of the Crown lawyers and 
prerogative judges ; you will find it impossible to discover any 
rational rule for your conduct, and can never rest upon any 
satisfactory view of the subject, unless you are pleased to 
adopt my description. Reason and justice equally recognize 
it, and believe me, that genuine law is much more closely con- 
nected with justice and reason than some persons will avow. 

Gentlemen, you are now apprised of the nature of the 
alleged hbel; it is a discussion upon the administration of 
pubHc men. I have also submitted to you my view of the 
law applicable to such a publication ; we are, therefore, pre- 
pared to go into the consideration of every sentence in the 
newspaper in question. 

But before I do so, just allow me to point your attention to 
the motives of this young gentleman. The Attorney-General 
has threatened him with fine and a dungeon ; he has told Mr. 
Magee that he should suffer in his purse and in his person. 
Mr. Magee knew his danger well. Mr. Magee, before he pub- 
lished this paper, was quite apprised that he ran the risk of 



72 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

fine and of imprisonment. He knew also that if lie changed 
his tone — that if he became merely neutral, but especially, if 
he "vvent over to the other side and praised the Duke of Rich- 
mond — if he had sufficient gravity to talk, without a smile, of 
the sorrow of the people of Ireland at his Grace's departure — 
if he had a visage sufficiently lugubrious to say so, without 
laughing, to cry out " mournfully, oh ! momTifully !" for the de- 
parture of the Duke of Richmond — ^if at a period when the 
people of Ireland, from Magherafelt to Dingiedecouch, are 
rejoicing at that departure, Mr. Magee could put on a solemn 
countenance and pick up a grave and narcotic accent, and 
have the resolution to assert the sorrow of the people for los- 
ing so sweet and civil a Lord Lieutenant — why, in that case, 
gentlemen, you know the consequences. They are obvious. 
He might Hbel certain classes of his Majesty's subjects with 
impunity ; he would get abundance of money, a place, and a 
pension — you know he would. The proclamations would be 
inserted in his paper. The wide-street advertisements, the 
ordnance, the barrack-board notices, and the advertisements 
of all the other public boards and offices — you can scarcely 
calculate how much money he sacrifices to his principles. I 
am greatly within bounds when I say, at least, £5,000 per 
annum, of the pubhc money, would reach him if he were to 
alter his tone, and abandon his opinions. 

Has he instructed me to boast of the sacrifices he thus 
makes ? No, gentlemen, no, no ; he deems it no sacrifice, be- 
cause he deskes no share in the pubHc plunder ; but I intro- 
duce this topic to demonstrate to you the pmity of his inten- 
tions. He cannot be actuated, in the part he takes, by mean or 
mercenary motives ; it is not the base lucre of gain that leads 
Jiim astray. If he be mistaken, he is, at least, disinterested 
and sincere. You may dislike his pohtical opinions, but you 
cannot avoid respecting the independence of his principles. 

Behold, now, the pubhcation which this man of pure princi- 
ples is called to answer for as a hbel. It commences thus : — 

"duke of kichmond. 

" As tlie Duke of Eiclimond -will shortly retire from the government 
of Ireland, it has been deemed necessary to take such a review of his 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 73 

administration as may, at least, warn his successor from pursuing tlie 
errors of his Grace's conduct. 

"The review shall contain many anecdotes of the Irish court which 
were never published, and which were so secret, that his Grace will 
not fail to be surprised at the sight of them in a newspaper. " 

In this paragraph there is nothing hbellous ; it talks of the 
errors, indeed, of his Grace's administration ; but I do not 
think the Attorney-General will venture to suggest, that the 
gentle expression of " errors," is a hbeh 

To err, gentlemen, is human : and his Grace is admitted, by 
the Attorney-General, to be but a man ; I shall waste none of 
your time in proving, that we may, without offence, treat of 
his " errors." But, this is not even the errors of the man, but 
of his administration ; it was not infallible, I humbly presume. 

I call your particular attention to the second paragraph ; it 
runs thus : 

" If the administration of the Duke of Richmond had been conducted 
with more than ordinary talent, its errors might, in some degree have 
been atoned for by its ability, and the people of Ireland, though they 
might have much to regret, yet would have something to admire ; but 
truly, after the gravest consideration, they must find themselves at a loss 
to discover any striking feature in his Grace's administration, that makes 
it superior to the worst of his predecessors." 

The Attorney-General dwelt much upon this paragraph, 
gentlemen, and the importance which he attached to it fur- 
nishes a strong illustration of his own consciousness of the 
weakness of his case. What is the meaniug of this para- 
graph ? I appeal to you whether it be more than this — that 
there has been nothing admirable in his administration — that 
there has not been much abihty displayed by it. So far, gen- 
tlemen, there is, indeed, no flattery, but stiU less of libel, un- 
less you are prepared to say, that to withhold praise fi'om any 
administration deserves punishment. 

Is it an indictable offence not to perceive its occult talents '? 
"Why, if it be, find my client guilty of not being a sycophant 
and a flatterer, and send him to prison for two years, to gratify 
the Attorney-General, who tells you that the Duke of Eick- 
mond is the best chief governor Ireland ever saw. 



74: SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

But the mischief, I am told, hes in the art of the sentence. 
Why, all that it says is, that it is difficult to discover the strik- 
ing features that distinguish this from bad administrations. It 
does not, gentlemen, assert that no such striking features ex- 
ist, much less, does it assert that no features of that kind exist, 
or that such features, although not striking, are not easily dis- 
cernible. So that, really, you are here again required to con- 
vict a man for not flattering. He thinks an administration un- 
talented and silly ; that is no crime ; he says, it has not been 
marked with talent or ability — that it has no striking fea- 
tures ; all this may be mistaken and false, yet there is nothing 
in it that resembles a crime. 

And, gentlemen, if it be true — if this be a foohsh adminis- 
tration, can it be an offence to say so? If it has had no 
striking featiu'es to distinguish it from bad administrations, can 
it be criminal to say so ? Are you prepared to say, that not 
one word of truth can be told under no less a penalty than 
years of a dungeon and heavy fines ? 

Kecollect, that the Attorney-General told you that the press 
was the protection of the people against the government. 
Good Heaven ! gentlemen, how can it protect the people 
against the government, if it be a crime to say of that govern- 
ment that it has committed errors, displays little talent, and 
has no striking features ? Did the prosecutor mock you, when 
he talked of the protection the press afforded to the people ? 
If he did not insult you by the admission of that upon which 
he will not allow you to act, let me ask, against what is the 
press to protect the people ? When do the people want pro- 
tection ? — when the government is engaged in dehnquencies, 
oppression, and crimes. It is against these that the people 
want the protection of the press. Now, I put it to your plain 
sense, whether the press can afford such protection, if it be pun- 
ished for treating of these crimes ? 

Still more, can a shadow of protection be given by a press 
that is not permitted to mention the errors, the talents, and 
the striking features of an administration ? Here is a watch- 
man admitted by the Attorney-General to be at his post to 
warn the people of then* danger, and the first thing that is 
done to this watchman is to knock him down and bring him to 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 75 

a dungeon for announcing tlie danger he is bound to disclose. 
I agree with the Attorney-General, the press is a protection, 
but it is not in its silence or in its voice of flattery. It can 
protect only by speaking out when there is danger, or error, 
or want of ability. If the harshness of this tone be com- 
plained of, I ask, what is it the Attorney-General would have ? 
Does he wish that this protection should speak so as not to 
be understood ; or, I again repeat it, does he mean to delude 
us with the name and the mockery of protection ? Upon this 
ground, I defy you to find a verdict for the prosecutor, with- 
out declaring that he has been guilty of an attempt to deceive, 
when he talked of the protection of the press against errors, 
ignorance, and incapacity, which it is not to dare even to 
name. Gentlemen, upon this second paragraph, I am en- 
titled to your verdict upon the Attorney-General's own ad- 
mission. 

He, indeed, passed on to the next sentence with an air of 
triumph, with the apparent certainty of its producing a con- 
viction ; I meet him upon it — I read it boldly — I will discuss 
it with you manfully — it is this : 

" They insulted, they oppressed, they mui'dered, and they deceived." 

The Attorney-General told us, rather ludicrously, that 
" They," meaning the Duke's predecessors, included, of course, 
himself. How a man could be included amongst his predeces- 
sors, it would be difficult to discover. It seems to be that mode 
of expression which would indicate that the Attorney-General, 
notwithstanding his foreign descent, has imbibed some of the 
language of the native Irish. But our blunders arise not, hke 
this, from a confusion of ideas ; they are generally caused by 
too great condensation of thought ; they are, indeed, frequently 
of the head, but never — never of the heart. Would I could 
say so much for the Attorney-General ; his blunder is not to 
be attributed to his cool and cautious head ; it sj^rung, I much 
fear, from the misguided bitterness of the bigotry of his heart. 

Well, gentlemen, this sentence does, in broad and distinct 
terms, charge the predecessors of the Duke, but not the Duke 
himself, with insult, oppression, murder, and deceit. But it is 
history, gentlemen : are you prepared to silence the voice of 



76 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

history ? Are you disposed to suppress tlie recital of facts — 
the story of the events of former days ? Is the historian, and 
the pubhsher of history, to be exposed to indictment and pun- 
ishment ? 

Let me read for you two passages from Doctor Leland's 
History of Ireland. I choose a remote period to avoid shock- 
ing your prejudices, by the recital of the more modern crimes 
of the faction to which most of you belong. Attend to this 
passage, gentlemen. 

"Anno 1574. — A solemn peace and concord was made between the 
Earl of Essex and Eelim O'Nial. However, at a feast, wherein the 
Earl entertained that chieftain, and at the end of their good cheer, 
O'Nial, with his wife, were seized ; their friends, who attended, were 
put to the sword before their faces. Felim, together with his wife 
and brother, were conveyed to DubHn, where they were cut up in 
quarters." 

How would you have this fact described ? In what lady- 
hke terms is the future historian to mention this savage and 
brutal massacre? Yet Essex was an Enghsh nobleman — a 
predecessor of his Grace ; he was accomplished, gallant, and 
gay ; the envied paramour of the virgin queen ; and, if he 
afterwards fell on the scaffold, one of the race of the ancient 
Irish may be permitted to indulge the fond superstition that 
would avenge the royal blood of the O'Nial and of his consort, 
on their perfidious English murderer. 

But my soul fills with bitterness, and I wiU read of no more 
Irish murders. I turn, however, to another page, and I will 
introduce to your notice another predecessor of his Grace the 
Duke of Richmond. It is Grey, who, after the recall of Es- 
sex, commanded the Enghsh forces in Munster. The fort of 
Smerwick, in Kerry, surrendered to Grey at discretion. It 
contained some Irish troops, and more than 700 Spaniards. 
The historian shall tell you the rest : 

"That mercy for which they sued was rigidly denied them. Wing- 
field was commissioned to disarm them, and when this service was per- 
formed, an English company was sent into the fort. 

"The Irish rebels found they were reserved for execution by martial 
law. 

" The Italian general and some officers were made prisoners of war : 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 77 

but tlie garrison was butchered «i cold blood ; nor is it without pain, 
that we find a service so horrid and detestable, committed to Sir Walter 
Baleigh." 

" The garrison was butcliered in cold blood," says the his- 
torian. Furnish us, Mr. Attorney-General, with gentle ac- 
cents and sweet words, to speak of this savage atrocity ; or 
will you indict the author ? Alas ! he is dead, full of years 
and respect — as faithful an historian as the prejudices of his 
day would allow, and a beneficed clergyman of your church. 

Gentlemen of the jury, what is the mild language of this 
paper compared with the indignant language of history? 
Raleigh — ^the ill-starred Ealeigh — fell a yictim to a tyrant 
master, a corrupt or overawed jury, and a virulent Attorney- 
General; he was baited at the bar with language more scm^i- 
lous and more foul than that you heard yesterday poured upon 
my chent. Yet, what atonement to civilization could his 
death afford for the horrors I have mentioned ? 

Decide, now, gentlemen, between those hbels — between that 
defamer's history and my client. He calls those predecessors 
of his Grace, murderers. History has left the living records 
of their crimes from the O'Nial, treacherously slaughtered, to 
the cruel cold butchery of the defenceless prisoners. Until I 
shall see the publishers of Leland and of Hume brought to 
your bar, I defy you to convict my client. 

To show you that my client has treated these predecessors 
of his Grace with great lenity, I will introduce to your notice 
one, and only one more of them ; and he, too, fell on the scaf- 
fold — the unfortunate Strafford, the best servant a despotic 
king could deske. 

Amongst the means taken to raise money in Ireland, for 
James the First, and his son Charles, a proceeding called " a 
commission to inquire into defective titles," was invented. It 
was a scheme, gentlemen, to inquire of every man what right 
he had to his own property, and to have it solemnly and 
legally determined that he had none. To effectuate this 
scheme required great management, discretion, and integrity. 
First, there were 4,000 excellent horse raised for the purpose 
of being, as Strafford himself said, " good lookers on." The 
rest of the arrangement I would recommend to modern prac- 



78 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

tice ; it would save much trouble. I will shortly abstract it 
fi-om two of Strafford's own letters. 

The one appears to have been written by him to the Lord 
Treasurer; it is dated the 3d December, 1634. He begins 
with an apology for not having been more expeditious in this 
work of plunder, for his employers were, it seems, impatient 
at the melancholy waste of time. He then says : 

"Howbeit, I mil redeem the time as mucli as I can, with such as may 
give furtherance to the king's title, and will inquire out fit men to serve 
upon the juries." 

Take notice of that, gentlemen, I pray you ; perhaps you 
thought that the " packing of juries " was a modern invention 
— a new discovery. You see how greatly mistaken you were ; 
the thing has example and precedent to support it, and the 
authority of both are, in our law, quite conclusive. 

The next step was to corrupt — oh, no, to interest the wise 
and learned judges. But commentary becomes unnecessary, 
when I read for you this passage from a letter of his to the 
king, dated the 9th of December, 1636 : 

"Your Majesty was graciously pleased, upon my humble advice, to 
bestow four shillings in the pound upon your Lord Chief Justice and 
Lord Chief Baron in this kingdom, fourth of the fii'st yearly rent raised 
upon the commission of defective title, which, upon observation, I find 
to be the best given that ever was. For now they do intend it, with a 
care and dihgence, such as if it was their own private, and most certain 
gaining to themselves ; every four shillings once paid, shall better your 
revenue for ever after, at least five pounds." 

Thus, gentlemen of the jury, all was ready for the mockery 
of law and justice, called a trial. 

Now let me take any one of you ; let me place him here, 
where Mr. Magee stands ; let him have his property at stake ; 
let it be of less value, I pray you, than a compensation for two 
years' imprisonment ; it wiU, however, be of sufficient value to 
interest and rouse aU your agony and anxiety. If you were 
so placed here, you would see before you the well-paid At- 
torney-General, perhaps, mahgnantly delighted to pour his 
rancor upon you; on the bench would sit the corrupt and 
partisan judge, and before you, on that seat which you now 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 79 

occupy, would be placed the packed and predetermined jury. 
I beg, sir, to know what would be your feelings, your honor, 
your rage ; would you not compare the Attorney-General to 
the gambler who played with a loaded die, and then you 
would hear him talk, in solemn and monotonous tones, of his 
conscience ! Oh, his conscience, gentlemen of the jury ! 

But the times are altered. The press, the press, gentlemen, 
has effectuated a salutary revolution ; a commission of de- 
fective titles would no longer be tolerated ; the judges can no 

longer be bribed with money, and jmies can no longer be • 

I must not say it. Yes, they can, you know — we all know they 
can be still inquired out, and " packed," as the technical phrase 
is. But you, who are not packed, you, who have been fairly 
selected, will see that the language of the pubUcation before 
us is mildness itself, compared with that which the truth of 
history requkes — compared with that which history has already 
used. 

I proceed with this alleged Hbel. 

The nest sentence is this — 

" The profligate, unprincipled Westmoreland." I throw 
down the paper and address myself in particular to some of 
you. There are, I see, amongst you some of our Bible dis- 
tributers, " and of our suppressors of vice." Distributers of 
Bibles, suppressors of vice — what call you profligacy ? What 
is it you would call profligacy? Suppose the peerage was 
exposed for sale — set up at open auction — it was at that time 
a judicial office — suppose that its price, the exact price of this 
judicial office, was accurately ascertained by daily experience 
— ^would you call that profligacy ? If pensions were multiplied 
beyond bounds and beyond example — if places were augment- 
ed until invention was exhausted, and then were subdivided 
and split into halves, so that two might take the emoluments 
of each, and no person do the duty — if these acts were resort- 
ed to in order to corrupt your representatives — would you, 
gentle suppressors of vice, call that profligacy ? 

If the father of children selected in the open day his adul- 
terous paramour — ^if the wedded mother of children displayed 
her crime unblushingly — ^if the assent of the titled or untitled 
wittol to his own shame was purchased with the people's 



80 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

money — if this scene — if these were enacted in the open day, 
would you call that profligacy, sweet distributers of Bibles? 
The women of Ireland have always been beauteous to a pro- 
verb; they were, without an exception, chaste beyond the 
terseness of a proverb to express ; they are still as chaste as in 
former days, but the depraved example of a depraved court 
has furnished some exceptions, and the action of criminal con- 
versation, before the time of Westmoreland unknown, has 
since become more familiar to our courts of justice. 

Call you the sad example which produced those exceptions 
— call you that profligacy, suppressors of vice and Bible dis- 
tributers ? The vices of the poor are within the reach of con- 
trol ; to suppress them, you can call in aid the churchwarden 
and the constable; the justice of the peace will readily aid 
you, for he is a gentleman — the Court of Sessions will punish 
those vices for you by fine, by imprisonment, and, if you are 
urgent, by whipping. But, suppressors of vice, who shall aid 
you to suppress the vices of the great ? Are you sincere, or 
are you, to use your own phraseology, whitewashed tombs — 
painted charnel-houses ? Be ye hypocrites ? If you are not 
— if you be sincere — (and, oh, how I wish that you were) — if 
you be sincere, I will steadily require to know of you, what 
aid you expect, to suppress the vices of the rich and great ? 
"Who will assist you to suppress those vices? The church- 
warden ! — ^why he, I beheve, handed them into the best pew 
in one of your cathedrals, that they might lovingly hear Di- 
vine service together. The constable ! — absurd. The justice 
of the peace ! — ^no, upon his honor. As to the Court of Ses- 
sions, you cannot expect it to interfere; and my lords the 
judges are really so busy at the assizes, in hurrying the grand 
juries through the presentments, that there is no leisure to 
look after the scandalous faults of the great. Who, then, sin- 
cere and candid suppressors of vice, can aid you? The 
Press; the Press alone talks of the profligacy of the great; 
and, at least, shames into decency those whom it may fail to 
correct. The Press is your, but your only assistant. Go, 
then, men of conscience, men of religion — go, then, and con- 
vict John Magee, because he published that Westmoreland 
was profligate and unprincipled as a lord heutenant — do, con- 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 81 

vict, and then return to your distribution of Bibles and to 
your attacks upon the recreations of the poor, under the name 
of vices. 

Do, convict the only aid which virtue has, and distribute 
your Bibles that you may have the name of being rehgious ; 
upon your sincerity depends my cKent's prospect of a verdict. 
Does he lean upon a broken reed ? 

I pass on from the sanctified portion of the jury which I 
have latterly addressed, and I call the attention of you aU to 
the nest member of the sentence — 

" The cold-hearted and cruel Camden." 

Here I have your prejudices all armed against me. In the 
administration of Camden, your faction was cherished and 
triumphant. WUl you prevent him to be called cold and 
cruel ? Alas ! to-day, why have I not men to address who 
would listen to me for the sake of impartial justice ! But 
even with you the case is too powerful to allow me to despair. / 

Well, I do say, " the cold and cruel Camden." Why, on one 
circuit, during his administration, there were one hundred 
individuals tried before one judge ; of these ninety-eight were 
capitally convicted, and ninety-seven hanged ! I understand 
one escaped ; but he was a soldier who murdered a peasant, 
or something of that trivial nature — ninety-seven victims in 
one circuit ! 

In the meantime, it was necessary, for the purposes of the 
Union, that the flame of rebellion should be fed. The meet- 
ings of the rebel colonels in the north were, for a length of 
time, regularly reported to government ; but the rebellion was 
not then ripe enough ; and whilst the fruit was coming to ma- 
turity, under the fostering hand of the administration, the 
wretched dupes atoned on the gallows for allowing themselves 
to be deceived. 

In the meantime the soldiery were turned in at free quar- 
ters amongst the wives and daughters of the peasantry ! 

Have you heard of Abercrombie, the vahant and the good 
— ^he who, mortally wounded, neglected his wound until vic- 
tory was ascertained — ^he who allowed his hfe's stream to flow 
unnoticed because his country's battle was in suspense — he 
who died the martyr of victory — ^he who commenced the ca- 



82 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

reer of glory on tlie land, and taught French insolence, than 
which there is nothing so permanent — even transplanted, it 
exhibits itself to the third and fourth generation — he taught 
French insolence, that the British and Irish soldier was as 
much his superior by laud, as the sailor was confessedly by 
sea^ie, in short, who commenced that career which has since 
placed the Irish Wellington on the highest pinnacle of glory. 
Abercrombie and Moore were in Ireland under Camden. 
Moore, too, has since fallen at the moment of triumph — 
Moore, the best of sons, of brothers, of friends, of men — the 
soldier and the scholar — the soul of reason and the heart of 
pity — Moore has, in documents of which you may plead igno- 
rance, left his opinions upon record with respect to the cruelty 
of Camden's administration. But you all have heard of Aber- 
crombie's proclamation, for it amounted to that ; he proclaimed 
that cruelty in terms the most unequivocal ; he stated to the 
soldiery and to the nation, that the conduct of -the Camden ad- 
ministration had rendered " the soldiery formidable to aU but 
the enemy." 

Was there no cruelty in thus degrading the British soldier ? 
And say, was not the process by which that degradation was 
effectuated cruelty ? Do, then, contradict Abercrombie, upon 
your oaths, if you dare ; but, by doing so, it is not my client 
alone you will convict — ^you will also convict yourselves of the 
foul crime of perjury. 

I now come to the third branch of this sentence ; and here 
I have an easy task. All, gentlemen, that is said to the arti- 
ficer and superiatendent of the Union is this — " the artful and 
treacherous CornwaUis." Is it necessary to prove that the 
Union was effectuated by artifice and treachery ? For my 
part, it makes my blood boil when I thilik of the unhappy pe- 
riod which was contrived and seized on to carry it into effect ; 
one year sooner, and it would have made a revolution — one 
year later, and it would hare been for ever impossible to carry 
it. The moment was artfully and treacherously seized on, 
and our country, that was a nation for countless ages, has 
dwindled into a province, and her name and her glory are ex- 
tinct for ever. 

I should not waste o moment upon this part of the case, but 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 83 

that the gentlemen at the other side who opposed that meas- 
ure have furnished me with some topics which I may not, can- 
not omit. Indeed Mr. Magee deserves no verdict from any 
Irish jury, who can hesitate to think that the contriver of the 
Union is treated with too much lenity in this sentence ; he 
fears your disapprobation for speaking with so Httle animosity 
of the artificer of the Union. 

There was one piece of treachery committed at that period, 
at which both you and I equally rejoice ; it was the breach of 
faith towards the leading Cathohcs ; the written j^romises 
made them at that period have been since printed ; I rejoice 
with you that they were not fulfilled ; when the Catholic 
trafficked for his own advantage upon his country's miseries, 
he deserved to be deceived. For this mockery, I thank the 
CornwaUis administration. I rejoice, also, that my first intro- 
duction to the stage of pubhc life, was in the opposition to 
that measure. 

In humble and obscure distance, I followed the footsteps of 
my present adversaries. What their sentiments were then of 
the authors of the Union, I beg to read to you ; I will read 
them from a newspaper set up for the mere purpose of oppos- 
ing the Union, and conducted under the control of these gen- 
tlemen. If their editor should be gravely denied, I shall only 
reply — " Oh, cease your funning."* 

The charge of being a Jacobin, was at that time made 
against the present Attorney-General — him, plain William 
Saurin — in the very terms, and with just as much truth as he 
now applies it to my client. His reply shall serve for that of 
Mr. Magee. I take it from the anti-Union of the 22nd March, 
1800. 

"To the charge of Jacobin, Mr. Saurin said he knew not what it 
meant, as applied to him, except it was an opposition to the will of 
the British minister." 

So says Mr. Magee ; but, gentlemen, my eye lights upon an- 
other passage of Mr. Saurin's in the same speech from which 
I have quoted the above. It was in these words : 

* A pamphlet full of wit and talent under this title was pubhshed by the So- 
licitor-General. 



84 SELECT SrEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

" Mr. Saiirin admitted, that debates might sometimes produce agi- 
tations, but that was the price necessarily paid for liberty." 

Oh, liow I thank this good Jew for the word. Yes, agita- 
tion is, as Mr. Saurin well remarked, the price necessarily paid 
for Hbertj. We have paid the price, gentlemen, and the hon- 
est man refuses to give us the goods. 

Now, gentlemen, of this Mr. Saurin, then an agitator, I beg 
leave to read the opinion upon tliis Union, the author of 
which we have only called artful and treacherous. Erom this 
speech of the 13th March, 1800, 1 select these passages : 

" Mr. Saurin said he felt it his duty to the crown, to the country, and 
to his famOy, to warn the minister of the dreadful consequences of per- 
severing in a measure which the people of Ireland almost unanimously 
disliked." 

And again — 

" He, for one, would assert the principles of the glorious revolution, 
and boldly declare in the face of the nation, that when the sovereign 
power dissolved the compact that existed between the government and 
the people, that moment the right of resistance accrues. 

" Whether it would be prudent in the people to avail themselves of that 
right would be another question. But if a legislative union were forced 
on the countiy, against the will of its inhabitants, it would be a nullity, 
and resistance to it would be a struggle against usui'pation, and not a 
resistance against law." 

May I be permitted just to observe, how much more violent, 
this agitator of the year 1800, than we poor and timid agita- 
tors of the year 1813. "When did we talk of resistance being 
a question of prudence ? Shame upon the men who call us 
intemperate, and yet remember their own violence. 

But, gentlemen, is the Attorney-General at Uberty to change 
the nature of things with his own official and professional 
prospects ? I am ready to admit that he receives thousands 
of pounds by the year of the public moneys, in his office of 
Attorney-General — thousands fi"om the Crown-Solicitor — thou- 
sands, for doing httle work, from the Custom-House ; but 
does all this pubhc booty with which he is loaded alter the 
nature of things, or prevent that from being a deceitful 
measure, brought about by artful and treacherous means, 
against which Mr. Saurin, in 1800, preached the holy doc- 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN JIAGEE. 85 

trine of insnrrection, sounded the tocsin of resistance, and 
summoned tlie people of the land to battle against it, as 
against usurpation ? 

In 1800, he absolves the subjects from their allegiance — ^if 
the usurpation, styled the Union, will be carried — and he, 
this identical agitator, in 1813, indicts a man, and calls him a 
ruffian, for speaking of the contrivers of the Union, not as 
usurpers, but as artful, treacherous men. Gentlemen, pity the 
situation in which he has placed himself; and pray, do not 
think of inflicting punishment upon my client for his extreme 
moderation. 

It has been coarsely urged, and it will, I know, be urged in 
the splendid misrepresentations with which the Solicitor-Gen- 
eral can so well distort the argument he is unable to meet — it 
will, I know, be urged by him, that having established the 
right to use this last paragraph — having proved that the pre- 
decessors of the Duke were oppressors and murderers, and 
profligate, and treacherous, that the hbel is only aggravated 
thereby, as the first paragraph compares and combines the 
Duke of Eichmond with the worst of his predecessors. 

This is a most fallacious assertion; and here it is that I 
could wish I had to address a dispassionate and an enlight- 
ened jury. You are not, you know you are not, of the selec- 
tion of my chent. Had he the poor privilege of the sheep- 
stealer, there are, at least, ten of you who should never have 
been on his jury. But the jury he would select is not such a 
jury in his favor, as has been impanelled against him ; he 
desires no favor ; he would desire only that the most respect- 
able and unprejudiced of your city should be selected for his 
trial ; his only ambition would be perfect impartiality ; he 
would desire, and I should desire for him, a jury whose ver- 
dict of conviction, if they did convict him,, would produce a 
sense of error and a feeling more painful to his mind of being 
wrong than a star-chamber sentence. 

If I had to address such a jury, how easily could I show 
them that there is no comparison — no attempt at simihtude. 
On the contrary, the object of the writer is clearly to make a 
contrast. Grey murdered ; but he was an able statesman ; his 
massacre was a crime in itself, but eminently useful to his em- 



86 SELECT SPEECHES OP DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

ployers ; it contributed mainly to secure the forfeiture of tlie 
overgrown territories of the House of Desmond. Esses was a 
murderer, but liis extreme of vice was accompanied by great 
military services ; he was principally instrumental in effectu- 
ating the conquest of Ireland — even his crimes served the 
cause of his royal mistress, and the territory of the slaugh- 
tered O'Nial became shire land ; he had terrific cruelty to 
answer for, but he could give it some answer in the splendor 
and solidity of his services. So of Strafford — he was an 
eminent oppressor, but he was also eminently useful to his 
royal master. 

As to the Duke of Richmond, the contrast is intended to be 
complete — he has neither great crimes nor great virtues. He 
did not murder, hke Essex and Grey, but he did not render 
any splendid services. In short, his administration has been 
directly the reverse of these. It has been marked by errors 
and not crimes. It has not displayed talents as they did ; and 
it has no striking features as they had. Such is the fair, 
the rational, and the just construction which a fair, rational, 
and just jury would put upon it. 

Indeed, the Attorney-General seems to feel it was necessary 
for him to resort to other topics, in order to induce you to con- 
vict upon this part of the case. He tells you that this is the 
second time that the Duke of Richmond has been called a 
murderer. Gentlemen, in this indictment there is no allega- 
tion that the Duke is styled a murderer by this pubhcation ; 
if there had been, he should be readily acquitted, even for the 
variance ; and when the Attorney-General resorts to Barry's 
case, he does it to inflame your passions, and mislead your un- 
derstandings — and then what has the Irish Magazine to do 
with this trial ? 

Walter Cox, with his Irish Magazine, is as good a Protestant 
as the king's Attorney-General, and probably quite as sincere 
in the profession of that rehgion, though by no means as much 
disposed to persecute those w^ho differ from him in religious 
belief. Indeed, if he were a persecutor of his countrymen, he 
would not be where he is — in prison ; he would probably en- 
joy a full share of the pubhc plunder, and which is now lav- 
ished on the stupid journals in the pay of the Castle — from the 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 87 

versatile, venal, and verbose correspondent, to the equally dull 
and corrupt Dublin Journal. 

It is, however, not true, that he is in jail because he pub- 
lished what is called a libel. The Attorney-General talked 
with a gloating pleasure of the miseries poor Watty Cox en- 
dures in jail — miseries that seem to give poignancy and zest 
to the enjoyments of his prosecutor. I will make him happy ; 
let him return from this court to his luxuries, and when he 
finds himself at his table, surrounded with every delicacy, and 
every profusion, remember that his prisoner Walter Cox is 
starving. I envy him not this rehsh, but I cannot suffer him 
to mislead you. Cox is not in jail because he published a 
libel ; he is there because he is poor. His time of imprison- 
ment expired last February, but he was condemned to pay a 
fine of X300, and having no money, he has since remained in 
jail It is his poverty, therefore, and not his crime, that detains 
him within the fangs of the Attorney-General — if, indeed, there 
be any greater crime in society than being poor. 

And next, the Attorney-General makes a beautiful eulogium 
on Magna Charta. There we agree. I should indeed prefer 
seeing the principles of that great charter called into practical 
effect, to hearing any palinode, however beautiful, said or sung 
on its merits. But what recommendation can Magna Charta 
have for poor Cox ? That charter of hberty expressly pro- 
vides that no man shall be fined beyond what he can pay. A 
very simple and natural provision against political severity. 
But Cox is fined £300 when he is not worth a single shilling. 
He appealed to this court for relief, and quotes Magna Charta. 
Your lordship was not pleased to give him any relief. He 
applies to the Court of Exchequer, and that Court, after 
hearing the Attorney-General against him, finds itself unable 
to give any relief ; and, after all this, the unfortunate man is 
to be tantahzed with hearing that the Attorney-General con- 
trived to couple his case with the praise of the great charter 
of liberty — a most unlucky coincidence — almost enough to 
drive him, in whose person that charter is violated, into a 
state of insanity. 

Poor Watty Cox is a coarse fellow, and, I think, he would 
be apt to reply to that praise in the profane and contemptuous 



88 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

rliyme of Cromwell ; most assuredly lie lias no reason to treat 
this useless law with great reverence. It would, indeed, ap- 
pear as if the prosecutor eulogized Magna Charta only to give 
more brilliancy to his triumph, which he has obtained in the 
person of poor Cox over it. 

The next to^^ic of the Attorney-General's triumphant abuse 
was the book entitled, " The Statement of the Penal Laws." He 
called it a convicted book. He exulted that the pubhsher was 
in prison ; he traduced the author, and he distorted and mis- 
represented the spirit and meaning of that book. As to the 
pubhsher, he is, I admit, in prison. The Attorney-General 
has had the pleasure of tearing a respectable citizen, of irre- 
proachable character and conduct, from his wife and the little 
children who were rendered comfortable by his honest, j)erse- 
vering industr}^ and he has immured him in a dungeon. I 
only congratulate him on his victory. 

As to the author, he is just the reverse of what the Attor- 
ney-General would wish him to be ;. he is a man of fortune ; 
he is an able lawyer — a professional scholar — an accomphshed 
gentleman — a sincere friend to his country, which he has orna- 
mented and served. As to the book, it is really ludicrous to 
an extreme degree of comicality to call it a convicted book. 
There are about 400 pages in the work ; it contains an elabo- 
rate,, unexaggerated, and, I think, softened detail of the laws 
which aggrieve the Catholics of Ireland, and of the practical 
results of those laws. Such a system, to which the Attorney- 
General is wedded, as much as to his own emolument, must 
have excited no small share of irritation in his miud. It pro- 
duced a powerful sensation on the entu-e party to which he 
belongs. Abundant attempts were made to answer it : they 
were paid for out of the pubhc money ; they totally failed, 
and yet if the book had been erroneous, there could be noth- 
ing easier than its confutation. 

If that book had been mistaken in matter of law, or exag- 
gerated in matter of fact, its refutation would have been found, 
where we have found and proved its perfect accuracy, in the 
statute book and in the daily experience of every individual in 
Ireland. Trath, you are told by the prosecutor, is no defence 
in case of hbel ; but certainly this book was mach the more 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 89 

provoking for being true ; and yet, gentlemen, with the most 
powerful incentives to prosecute this book, the Attorney- 
General has been compelled, most reluctantly, to spare every 
word of the 400 pages of text and margin, and has been una- 
ble to find any pretext for an indictment, save in a paltry note 
containing eight lines and a half, and three marks of admi- 
ration. , 

My lords, I address your lordships particularly on the three 
notes of admiration, because they formed a prominent ground 
in your lordship's learned argument, when you decided that 
the passage was a libel per se. Yes, gentlemen, admire again, 
I pray you, the solidity and brilliancy of our law, in which 
three marks of admiration are of wonderful efficacy in send- 
ing a man to prison. But with the exception of the note of 
eight and a half hues, the book has borne the severest criti- 
cism of fact and of law. It has defied, and continues to defy, 
the present Attorney-General and his well-assorted juries ; 
and, as to the note which he indicted, it contained only a 
remark on the execution of a man who, whether innocent or 
guilty, was tried in such a manner, that a gentleman of the 
Irish bar, his counsel, threw up his brief in disgust ; and when 
the judge who presided at the trial ordered the counsel to re- 
main and defend Barry, that counsel swore, in this court, that 
he rejected the judge's mandate with contempt. 

What a mighty triumph was the conviction proved against 
this note on Barry's case ! And may one be permitted mourn- 
fully to ask, whether the indignation, which might have pro- 
duced indiscretion in speaking of Barry's fate, was a very cul- 
pable quahty in a feeling mind, prone to detest the horrors 
with which human blood is sometimes shed under the forms 
and mockery of trial ? But that conviction, although it wiU 
erase the note, will not stay the demand which an intelHgent 
pubhc make for this valuable work. Already have two valua- 
ble editions of it been sold, and a thkd edition is loudly called 
for, and about to appear. 

What, in the meantime, has been the fate of the answers ? I 
see two booksellers amongst you ; they will tell you that the 
answers are recollected only by the loss they have produced 
to them, and bv the cumbering of their shelves. Such is the 



90 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

result of the loyal triumpli of his Grace the Duke of Eich- 
mond's administration. May such in every age be the fruits 
of every prosecutor of fi-ee discussion, and of the assertion of 
pohtical truth ! 

I have followed the Attorney-General through his discus- 
sion upon Walter Cox, and "The Statement of the Penal 
Laws," without being able exactly to conjecture his motives for 
introducing them. As to Cox, it appears to be the mere grati- 
fication of his delight at the misery to which that unfortunate 
man is reduced. As to " the book," I can only conjecture that 
his wish is to insinuate to you that the author of " the book " 
and of this pubhcation is the same. If that were his design, 
it may be enough to say, that he has not proved the fact, and, 
therefore, in fairness, it ought not at all to influence your de- 
cision. I go further and tell him, that the fact is not so ; that 
the author is a different person ; that the writer of this alleged 
hbel is a Protestant — a man of fortune — a man of that rank 
and estimation, that even the Attorney-General, were I to an- 
nounce his name, which my client will never do, or suffer his 
advocate to do, that name would extort respect, even from the 
Attorney-General himself. 

He has, in his usual fashion, calumniated the spirit and 
object of " The Statement of the Penal Laws." He says it 
imputes murder and every other crime to persons in high sta- 
tions, as resulting from their being Protestants. He says that 
it attributes to the Lord Lieutenant the committing mui'der 
on a Catholic, because he himself is a Protestant. Gentlemen, 
I wish you had read that book ; if you did, it would be quite 
unnecessary for me to contradict those assertions of the Attor- 
ney-General. Li fact, there never were assertions more vm- 
founded : that book contains nothing that could warrant his 
description of it ; on the contrary, the book seeks to establish 
this position, that the grievances which the Lish Cathohcs 
suffer, are not attributable to the Protestant religion — that 
they are repugnant to the spirit of that religion, and are attri- 
butable, simply and singly, to the spuit of monopoly, and tone 
of superiority, generated and fostered by the system of exclu- 
sion, upon which the Penal Code rests. 

The author of that book is confessedly a Catholic ; yet the 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 91 

book states, and tlie Attorney-General heard tlie passage twice 
read in this court, that " if Eoman CathoUcs were placed, by 
unjust laws, in the situation in which the Irish Protestants 
now are placed, they would oppress and exclude precisely as 
the Protestants now do." In shott, his statement and rea- 
sonings are founded on this, that it is unjust to give any reli- 
gion exclusive political advantages ; because, whatever that 
rehgion may be, the result will necessarily prove oppressive 
and insulting towards the less favored sect. He argues not 
exclusively against any particular rehgion, but from natural 
causes operating on human beings. His book may be a libel 
on human nature, but it is no more a Hbel on the Protestant 
than on the Cathohc religion. It draws no other inference 
than this, that Catholics and Protestants, under similar cir- 
cumstances, would act precisely in the same way. 

Having followed the prosecutor through this weary digres- 
sion, I return to the next sentence of this publication. Yet I 
cannot — I must detain you still a Httle longer from it, whilst I 
supplicate your honest indignation, if in your resentments 
there be aught of honesty, against the mode in which the At- 
torney-General has introduced the name of our aged and 
afflicted sovereign. He says, this is a libel on the king, be- 
cause it imputes to him a selection of improper and criminal 
chief governors. Gentlemen, this is the very acme of servile 
doctrine. It is the most unconstitutional doctrine that could 
be uttered : it supposes that the sovereign is responsible for 
the acts of his servants, whUst the constitution declares that 
the king can do no wrong, and that even for his personal acts, 
his servants shall be personally responsible. Thus, the Attor- 
ney-General reverses for you the constitution in theory ; and, 
in point of fact, where can be found, in this publication, any, 
even the shghtest allusion to his Majesty? The theory is 
against the Attorney-General, and yet, contrary to the fact, 
and agaiast the theory, he seeks to enlist another prejudice of 
yours against Mr. Magee. 

Prejudice did I call it? oh, no! it is no prejudice; that 
sentiment which combines respect with affection for my aged 
sovereign, suffering under a calamity with which heaven has 
willed to visit him, but which is not due to any default of his. 



92 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

There never was a sentiment that I should wish to see more 
cherished — more honored. To you the king may appear an 
object of respect ; to his Cathohc subjects he is one of vene- 
ration ; to them he has been a bountiful benefactor. To the 
utter disregard of your alclermen of Skinner's Alley, and the 
more pompous magnates of William street, his Majesty pro- 
cured, at his earnest sohcitation from parhament, the restora- 
tion of much of our hberties. He disregarded your anti-Po- 
pery petitions. He treated with calm indifference the ebulli- 
tions of your bigotry ; and I owe to him that I have the 
honor of standing in the proud situation from which I am 
able, if not to protect my client, at least to pour the indignant 
torrent of my discourse against his enemies, and those of his 
country. ^ 

The publication to wliich I now recall you, goes to describe 
the effects of the facts which I have shown you to have been 
drawn from the undisputed and authentic history of former 
times." I have, I hope, convinced you, that neither Leland 
nor Hume could have been indicted for stating those facts, 
and it would be a very strange perversion of principle, which 
would allow you to convict Mr. Magee for that which has 
been stated by other writers, not only without punishment, but 
with applause. 

That part of the paragraph which relates to the present day 
is in these words : 

"Since that period the complexion of the times has changed — the 
countiy has advanced — it has outgrown submission, and some forms, at 
least, must now be observed towards the people." . 

The system, however, is still the same ; it is the old play 
with new decorations, presented in an age somewhat more en- 
lightened ; the principle of government remains unaltered — a 
principle of exclusion which debars the majority of the peo- 
ple from the enjoyment of those privileges that are possessed 
by the minority, and which must, therefore, maintain itself by 
aU those measures necessary for a government founded on 
injustice. 

The prosecutor insists that this is the most libellous part of 
the enth-e pubhcation. I am glad he does so ; because if 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 93 

tliere be amongst you a single particle of discrimination, you 
cannot fail to perceive that this is not a hbel — that this para- 
graph cannot constitute any crime. It states that the present 
is a system of exclusion. Surely, it is no crime to say so ; it 
is what you all say. It is what the Attorney-General himself 
gloried iiL This is, said he, exclusively a Protestant govern- 
ment. Mr. Magee and he are agreed. Mr. Magee adds, 
that a principle of exclusion, on account of rehgion, is found- 
ed on injustice. Gentlemen, if a Protestant were to be ex- 
cluded from any temporal advantages upon the score of his 
religion, would not you say that the principle upon which he 
was excluded was unjust ? That is precisely what Mr. Magee 
says; for the principle which excludes the Catholic in Ire- 
land, would exclude the Protestant in Spain and in Portugal, 
and there you clearly admit its injustice. So that, really, you 
would condemn yourselves, and your own opinions, and the 
right to be a Protestant in Spain and Portugal, if you con- 
demn this sentiment. 

But I would have you further observe that this is no more 
than the discussion of an abstract principle of government ; it 
arraigns not the conduct of any individual, or of any adminis- 
tration ; it only discusses and decides upon the moral fitness 
of a certain theory, on which the management of the affairs of 
Ireland has been conducted. If this be a crime, we are all 
criminals ; for this question, whether it be just or not to ex- 
clude from power and office a class of the people for religion, 
is the subject of daily — of hourly discussion. The Attorney- 
General says it is quite just ; I proclaim it to be unjust — ob- 
viously unjust. At all public meetings, in all private companies, 
this point is decided in different ways, according to the tem- 
per and the interest of individuals. Indeed, it is but too much 
the topic of every man's discourse ; and the jails and the bar- 
racks of the country would not contain the hundredth part of 
those whom the Attorney-General would have to crowd into 
them, if it be penal to call the principle of exclusion unjust. 
In this court, without the least danger of interruption or re- 
proof, I proclaim the injustice of that principle. 

I will then ask whether it be lawful to print that Avhich it is 
not unlawful to proclaim in the face of a court of justice ? And 



94 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

above all, I will ask whetlier it can be criminal to discuss tho 
abstract principles of government ? Is the theory of the law a 
prohibited subject ? I had understood that there was no right 
so clear and undoubted as that of discussing abstract and 
theoretic principles, and their applicabihty to practicable pur- 
poses. For the first time do I hear this disputed ; and now 
see what it is the Attorney-General prohibits. He insists upon 
punishing Mr. Magee ; first, because he accuses his adminis- 
tration of " errors ;" secondly, because he charges them with 
not being distinguished for " talents ;" thirdly, because he can- 
not discover then* " striking features ;" and fourthly, because 
he discusses an " abstract principle !" 

This is quite intelhgible — this is quite tangible. I begin to 
understand what the Attorney- General means by the liberty of 
the Press ; it means a prohibition of printing anything except 
praise, respecting " the errors, the talents, or the striking fea- 
tures " of any administration, and of discussing any abstract 
principle of government. Thus the forbidden subjects are er- 
rors, talents, striking features, and principles. Neither the 
theory of the government nor its practices are to be discussed ; 
you may, indeed, praise them ; you may call the Attorney- 
General " the best and wisest of men ;" you may call his lord- 
ship the most learned and impartial of all possible chief justices ; 
you may, if you have powers of visage sufficient, call the Lord 
Lieutenant the best of all imaginable governors. That, gen- 
tlemen, is the boasted hberty of the press — the liberty that ex- 
ists in Constantinople — the Hberty of applying the most ful- 
some and unfounded flattery, but not one word of censure or 
reproof. 

Here is an idol worthy of the veneration of the Attorney- 
General. Yes ; he talked of his veneration for the liberty of 
the press ; he also talked of its being a protection to the peo- 
ple against the government. Protection ! not against errors — 
not against the want of talents or striking features — nor 
against the effort of any unjust principle — protection ! against 
what is it to protect ? Did he not mock you ? Did he not 
plainly and palpably delude you, when he talked of the protec- 
tion of the press ? Yes. To his inconsistencies and contra- 
dictious he calls on you to sacrifice youi- consciences ; and be- 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OE JOHN MAGEE. 95 

cause you are no-Poperj men, and distributers of Bibles, and 
aldermen of Skinner's Alley, and Protestant petitioners, lie re- 
quires of you to brand your souls with perjury. You cannot 
escape it ; it is, it must be perjury to find a verdict for a man 
wlio gravely admits that the liberty of the press is recognized 
by law, and that it is a venerable object, and yet calls for 
your verdict upon the ground that there is no such thing in ex- 
istence as that which he has admitted, that the law recognizes, 
and that he himself venerates. 

Clinging to the fond but faint hope that you are not capa- 
ble of sanctioning, by your oaths, so monstrous an inconsis- 
tency, I lead you to the nest sentence upon this record. 

"Althongli his Grace does not appear to know "wliat are the quali- 
ties necessary for a judge in Canada, or for an aid-de-camp in waiting 
at a court, he surely cannot be ignorant of what are requisites for a lord 
lieutenant." 

This appears to be a very innocent sentence ; yet the Attor- 
ney-General, the venerator of that protection of the people 
against a bad government — the hberty of the press — tells you 
that it is a gross Mbel to impute so much ignorance to his 
Grace. As to the aid-de-camp, gentlemen, whether he be se- 
le.tad for the brilliancy of his spurs, the pohsh of his boots, or 
the precise angle of his cocked hat, are grave considerations 
which I refer to you. Decide upon these atrocities, I pray you. 
But as to the judge in Canada, it cannot be any reproach to 
his. Grace to be ignorant of his quahfications. The old French 
law prevails in Canada, and there is not a lawyer at the Irish 
bar, except, perhaps, the Attorney-General, who is sufficiently 
acquainted with that law to know how far any man may be fit 
for the station of judge in Canada. 

If this be an ignorance without reproach in Irish lawyers, 
and if there be any reproach in it, I feel it not, whilst I avow 
that ignorance — ^yet, surely it is absurd to torture it into a 
calumny against the Lord Lieutenant — a military man, and no 
lawyer. I doubt whether it would be a libel if my chent had 
said, that his Grace was ignorant of the quahties necessary 
for a judge in Ireland — for a chief judge, my lord. He has 
,not said so, however, gentlemen, and true or false, that is not 



96 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

now the question under consideration. We are in Canada at 
present, gentlemen, in a ludicrous search for a libel in a sen - 
tence of no great point or meaning. If you are sapient enough 
to suspect that it contains a Hbel, your doubt can only arise 
from not comprehending it ; and that, I own, is a doubt diffi- 
cult to remove. But I mock you when I talk of this insig- 
nificant sentence. 

I shall read the next paragraph at full length. It is con- 
nected with the Canadian sentence : 

" Therefore, were an appeal to be made to liim in a dispassionate and 
sober moment, we might candidly confess that the Irish would not be 
disappointed in their hopes of a successor, though they would behold 
the same smiles, experience the same sincerity, and witness the same 
disposition towards concihation. 

"What, though they were deceived in 1795, and found the mildness of 
aFitzwilliam a false omen of concord ; though they were duped in 1800, 
and found that the privileges of the Catholics did not follow the extinc- 
tion of the parliament, yet, at his departure, he will, no doubt, state 
good grounds for future expectation ; that his administration was not 
the time for Emancipation, but that the season is fast approaching ; that 
there were 'existing circumstances,' but that now the lieoi^le may rely 
upon the virtues even of an hereditary Prince ; that they should continue 
to worship the false idol ; that their cries must, at least, be heard ; and 
that, if he has not compUed, it is only because he has not spoken. In 
short, his Grace wiU in no way vary from the uniform conduct observed 
by most of his predecessors, first preaching to the confidence of the 
people, then playing upon their credulity. 

"He came over ignorant — he soon became jprejudiced, and then he 
became intemperate. He takes from the people their money ; he eats 
of their bread, and drinks of their wine ; in return, he gives them a bad 
government, and, at his departure, leaves them more distracted than 
ever. His Grace commenced his reign by flattery, he continued it in 
folly, he accompanied it with violence, and he will conclude it with 
falsehood." 

There is one part of this sentence, for which I most respect- 
fully solicit your indulgence and pardon. Be not exasperated 
with us for talking of the mildness of Lord Fitzwilliam, or of 
his administration. But, notwithstanding the violence any 
praise of him has excited amongst you, come dispassionately, I 
pray you, to the consideration of the paragraph. Let us ab- 
stract the meaning of it from the superfluous words. It cer- 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 97 

tainly does tell you, tliat his Grace came over ignorant of Irish, 
affairs, and he acquired prejudices upon those subjects, and ho 
has become intemperate. Let us discuss this part sepa- 
rately from the other matter suggested by the paragraph in 
question. That the Duke of Kichmond came over to Ireland 
ignorant of the details of our domestic policy cannot be mat- 
ter either of surprise or of any reproach. A mihtary man en- 
gaged in these pursuits which otherwise occupy persons of 
his rank, altogether unconnected with Ireland, he could not 
have had any inducement to make himself acquainted with 
the details of our barbarous wrongs, of our senseless party 
quarrels, and criminal feuds ; he was not stimulated to examine 
them by any interest, nor could any man be attracted to study 
them by taste. It is, therefore, no censure to talk of his igno- 
rance — of that with which it would be absurd to expect that 
he should be acquainted ; and the knowledge of which would 
neither have served, nor exalted, nor amused him. 

Then, gentlemen, it is said he became " prejudiced." Preju- 
diced may sound harsh in your ears ; but you are not, at least 
you ought not, to decide upon the sound — ^it is the sense of 
the word that should determine you. Now what is the sense 
of the word "prejudice " here ? It means the having adopted / 
precisely the opinions which every one of you entertain. By f 
"prejudice" the writer means, and can mean, nothing but 
such sentiments as you cherish. When he talks of prejudice, 
he intends to convey the idea that the Duke took up the opi- 
nion, that the few ought to govern the many in Ireland ; that 
there ought to be a favored and an excluded class in Ireland ; 
that the burdens of the state ought to be shared equally, but its 
benefits conferred on a few. Such are the ideas conveyed by 
the word prejudice ; and I fearlessly ask you, is it a crime to 
impute to his Grace these notions which you yourselves enter- 
tain ? Is he calumniated — ^is he hbelled, when he is charged 
with concurring with you, gentlemen of the jury ? Will you, 
by a verdict of conviction, stamp your own political sentiments 
with the seal of reprobation ? If you convict my client, you 
do this : you decide that it is a hbel to charge any man with 
those doctrines which are so useful to you individually, and 
of which you boast ; or, you think the opinions just, and yet 



98 SELECT SPEECHES OP DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

that it is criminal to charge a man with those just opinions. 
For the sake, therefore, of consistency, and as an approval 
of your own opinions, I call on you for a verdict of acquittal. 

I need not detain you long on the expression " intemper- 
ate ;" it does not mean any charge of excess of indulgence in 
any enjoyment ; it is not, as the Attorney-General suggested, 
an accusation of indulging beyond due bounds in the pleasures 
of the table, or of the bottle ; it does not allude, as the Attor- 
ney-General says, to midnight orgies, or to morning revels. I 
admit — I freely admit — that an allusion of that kind would 
savor of libel, as it would certainly be unnecessary for any 
purpose of political discussion. But the intemperance here 
spoken of is mere poHtical intemperance ; it is that vio- 
lence which every man of a fervid disposition feels in support 
of his political opinions. Nay, the more pure and honest any 
man may be in the adoption of his opinions, the more likely, 
and the more justifiable will he be in that ardent support of 
them, which goes by the name of intemperance. 

In short, although pohtical intemperance cannot be deemed 
by cold calculators as a virtue, yet it has its source in the 
purest virtues of the human heart, and it frequently produces 
the greatest advantages to the public. How would it be pos- 
sible to overcome the many obstacles which self-interest, and 
ignorance, and passion throw in the way of improvement, with- 
out some of that ardor of temper and disposition which grave 
men call intemperance? And, gentlemen, are not your opinions 
as deserving of warm support as the opinion of other men ; 
or do you feel any inherent depravity in the political senti- 
ments which the Duke of Eichmond has adopted from you, 
that would render him depraved or degraded by any Adolence 
in their support ? You have no alternative. If you convict 
my chent, you condemn, upon your oaths, your own pohtical 
creed ; and declare it to be a hbel to charge any man with 
energy in your cause. 

If you are not disposed to go this length of political incon- 
sistency, and if you have determined to avoid the religious 
inconsistency of perjming yourselves for the good and glory 
of the Protestant religion, do, I pray you, examine the rest 
of this paragraph, and see whether you can, by any ingo- 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 99 

nuitj, detect tliat nondescript, a libel, in it. It states in sub- 
stance this : that this administration, treading in the steps of 
former administrations, preached to the conj&dence of the peo- 
ple, and played on their credulity ; and that it will end, as 
those administrations have done, in some flattering prophecy, 
paying present disappointment with the coinage of delusive 
hope. That this administration commenced, as usual, with 
preaching to the confidence of the people, was neither crimi- 
nal in the fact, nor can it be unpleasant in the recital. 

It is the immemorial usage of all administrations and of all 
stations, to commence with those civil professions of future 
excellence of conduct which are called, and not unaptly, 
"preaching to the confidence of the people." The very 
actors are generally sincere at this stage of the political 
farce ; and it is not insinuated that this administration was 
not as candid on tliis subject as the best of its predecessors. 
The playing on the creduhty of the people is the ordinary 
state trick. You recollect how angry many of you were with 
his Grace for his Munster tour, shortly after his arrival here. 
You recollect how he checked the Mayor of Cork for propos- 
ing the new favorite Orange toast; what liberahty he dis- 
played to Popish traders and bankers in Limerick; and 
how he returned to the capital, leaving behind him the im- 
pression that the no-Popery men had been mistaken in their 
choice, and that the Duke of Richmond was the enemy of 
every bigotry — the friend to every liberality ! Was he sin- 
cere, gentlemen of the jury, or was this one of those innocent 
devices which are called — playing on the people's credulity? 
Was he sincere ? Ask his subsequent conduct. Have there 
been since that time any other or difierent toasts cheered in 
his presence? Has the name of Ireland and of Irishmen 
been profaned by becoming the sport of the warmth excited 
by the accompaniment to these toasts ? Some individuals of 
you could inform me. I see another dignitary of your cor- 
poration here [said Mr. O'Connell, turning round pointedly to 
the lord mayor] — I see a civic dignitary here, who could teU 
of the toasts of these days or nights, and would not be at a 
loss to apply the right name — if he were not too prudent as 
well as too polite to do so — to that innocent affectation of lib- 



100 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONKELL. 

erality wliicli distinguislied liis Grace's visit to tlie soutli of 
Ireland. It was, indeed, a play upon our credulity, but it can 
be no libel to speak of it as such. ; for see the situation in 
which you would place his Grace ; you know he affected con- 
ciliation and perfect neutrality between our parties at first ; you 
know he has since taken a marked and decided part with you. 

Surely you are not disposed to call this a crime, as it were, 
to convict his Grace of duphcity, and of a vile hypocrisy. No, 
gentlemen, I entreat of you not to calumniate the Duke ; call 
this conduct a mere play on the credulity of a people easily 
deceived — innocent in its intention, and equally void of guilt 
in its description. Do not attach to those words a meaning 
which would prove that you yourselves condemned, not so 
much the writer of them, as the man who gave color and coun- 
tenance to this assertion. Besides, gentlemen, what is your 
liberty of the press worth, if it be worthy of a dungeon to 
assert that the public credulity has been played upon ? The 
liberty of the press would be less than a dream, a shadow, if 
every such phrase be a hbel. 

But the Attorney-General triumphantly tells you that there 
must be a libel in this paragraph, because it ends with a 
charge of falsehood. May I ask you to take the entire para- 
graph together ? Common sense and your duty require you 
to do so. You will then perceive that this charge of falsehood 
is no more than an opinion, that the administration of the 
Duke of Richmond will terminate precisely as that of many of 
his predecessors has done, by an excuse for the past — a flat- 
tering and fallacious promise for the futui'e. Why, you must 
all of you have seen, a short time since, an account of a pub- 
lic dinner in London, given by persons styling themselves 
"Friends to ReHgious Liberty." At that dinner, at which 
two of the Eoyal Dukes attended, there were, I think, no less 
than four or five noblemen who had filled the office of lord 
lieutenant of Ireland. Gentlemen, at this dinner, they were 
ardent in their professions of kindness towards the CathoHcs 
of Ireland, in their declarations of the obvious policy and jus- 
tice of conciliation and concession, and they bore ample testi- 
mony to our sufferings and our merits. But I appeal from 
their present declarations to their past conduct ; they are now 




O'CON NELL'S MONUMENT, 

In Glasnevm Cemetery. 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 101 

full of liberality and justice to us ; yet, I speak only tlie truth 
of history, when I say that, during their government of this 
country, no practical benefits resulted from all this wisdom 
and kindness of sentiment ; with the single exception of Lord 
FitzwilHam, not one of them even attempted to do any good 
to the Catholics, or to Ireland. 

What did the Duke of Bedford do for us ? Just nothing. 
Some civility, indeed, in words — some playing on public 
creduHty — but in act and deed, nothing at all. What did 
Lord Hardwicke do for us ? Oh, nothing, or rather less than 
nothing ; his administration here was, in that respect, a kind 
of negative quality ; it was cold, harsh, and forbidding to the 
Cathohcs ; lenient, mild, and encouraging to the Orange fac- 
tion ; the public mind lay in the first torpor caused by the 
mighty fall of the Union, and whilst we lay entranced in the 
oblivious pool, Lord Hardwicke's administration proceeded 
without a trace of that justice and liberality which it appears 
he must have thought unbefitting the season of his govern- 
ment, and which, if he then entertained, he certainly con- 
cealed ; he ended, however, with giving us flattering hopes for 
the future. The Duke of Bedford was more explicit ; he 
promised in direct terms, and drew upon the future exertions 
of an hereditary prince, to compensate us for present disap- 
pointment. And will any man assert that the Duke of Rich- 
mond is libelled by a comparison with Lord Hardwicke ; that 
he is traduced when he is compared with the Duke of Bed- 
ford ? If the words actually were these : " The Duke of Eich- 
mond will terminate his administration exactly as Lord Hard- 
wicke and the Duke of Bedford terminated their administra- 
tions ;" if those were the words, none of you could possibly 
vote for a conviction, and yet the meaning is precisely the 
same. No more is expressed by the language of my client ; 
and, if the meaning be thus clearly innocent, it would be 
strange, indeed, to call on you for a verdict of conviction upon 
no more soHd ground than this, that whilst the signification 
was the same, the words were different. And thus, again, does 
the prosecutor require of you to separate the sense from the 
sound, and to convict for the sound, agaiust the sense of the 
passage. 



102 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

In plain truth, gentlemen, if there be a harshness in the 
sound, there is none in the words. The writer describes, and 
means to describe, the ordinary termination of every adminis- 
tration repaying in promise the defaults of performance. And, 
when he speaks of falsehood, he prophecies merely as to the 
probable or at least possible conclusion of the present govern- 
ment. He does not impute to any precedent assertion, false- 
hood ; but he does predict, that the concluding promise of this, 
as of other administrations, depending as those promises always 
do upon other persons for performance, will remain as former 
promises have remained — unfulfilled and unperformed. And 
is this prophecy — this prediction a crime? Is it a libel to 
prophecy? See what topics this sage venerator of the Hberty 
of the press, the Attorney-General, would fain prohibit ? First, 
he tells you, that the crimes of the predecessors of the Duke 
must not be mentioned — and thus he forbids the history of 
past events. Secondly, he informs you, that no allusion is to 
be made to the errors, follies, or even the striking features 
of the present governors ; and thus he forbids the detail of 
the occurrences of the present day. And, thirdly, he declares 
that no conjecture shall be made upon what is hkely to occur 
hereafter ; and thus he forbids all attempts to anticipate future 
acts. 

It comes simply to this ; he talks of venerating the hberties 
of the press, and yet he restrains that press from discussing 
past history, present story, and futiu'e probabihties ; he pro- 
hibits the past, the present, and the future ; ancient records, 
modem truth, and prophecy, are all within the capacious 
range of his punishments. Is there anything else ? Would 
this venerator of the hberty of the press go fmther ? Yes, 
gentlemen, having forbidden all matter of history past and 
present, and all prediction of the future, he generously throws 
in abstract principles, and, as he has told you, that his prisons 
shall contain every person who speaks of what was, or what is, 
or what will be, he hkewise consigned to the same fate every 
person who treats of the theory or principles of government ; 
and yet he dares to talk of the liberty of the press ! Can you 
be his dupes ? Will you be his victims ? Where is the con- 
science — where is the indignant spirit of insulted reason 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 103 

amongst you ? Has party feeling extinguished in your breasts 
every glow of virtue — every spark of manhood ? 

If there be any warmth about you — ^if you are not clay- cold 
to all but party feeling, I would, with the air and in the tone 
of triumph, call you to the consideration of the remaining 
paragraph which has been spread on the lengthened indict- 
ment before you. I divide it into two branches, and shall do 
no more with the one than to repeat it. I have read it for 
you already ; I must read it again : 

"Had Lie remained •what he first came over, or what he afterwards 
professed to be, he would have retained his reputation for honest, open 
hostihty, defending his pohtical principles with firmness, perhaps with 
warmth, but without rancor ; the supporter and not the tool of an ad- 
ministration ; a mistaken politician, perhajas, but an honorable man, and 
a respectable soldier. " 

Would to God I had to address another jury ! Would to 
God I had reason and judgment to address, and I could en- 
tertain no apprehension from passion or prejudice ! Here 
should I then take my stand, and require of that unprejudiced 
jury, whether tliis sentence does not demonstrate the complete 
absence of private malice or personal hostiUty. Does not this 
sentence prove a kindly disposition towards the individual, 
mixing and mingling with that discussion which freedom sanc- 
tions and requires, respecting his political conduct ? Contrast 
this sentence with the prosecutor's accusation of private mahg- 
nity, and decide between Mr. Magee and his calumniators. 
He, at least, has this advantage, that your verdict cannot alter 
the nature of things ; and that the public must see and feel 
this truth, that the present prosecution is directed against the 
discussion of the conduct towards the public, of men confided 
with public authority ; that this is a direct attack upon the 
right to call the attention of the people to the management of 
the people's affairs, and that, by your verdict of conviction, it 
is intended to leave no peaceful or unawed mode of redress for 
the wrongs and sufferings of the people. 

But I will not detain you on these obvious topics. Wo 
draw to a close, and I hurry to it. This sentence is said to 
be particularly libellous : 



104 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

" His party would have been proud of liim ; liis friends would have 
p-aised (they need not have flattered him), and his enemies, though they 
might have regretted, must have respected his conduct ; from the worst 
quarter there would have been some small tribute of praise ; from none 
any great portion of censure ; and his administration, though not popu- 
lar, would have been conducted with dignity, and without offence. 
This line of conduct he has taken care to avoid : his original character 
for moderation he has forfeited ; he can lay no claims to any merits for 
neutrality, nor does he even deserve the cheerless credit of defensive 
operations. He has begim to act ; he has ceased to be a dispassionate 
chief governor, who views the wickedness and the folly of faction with 
composui-e and forbearance, and stands, the representative of majesty, 
aloof from the contest. He descends ; he mixes with the throng ; he 
becomes personally engaged, and, having lost his temper, calls forth his 
private passions to support his public principles ; he is no longer an 
indifferent viceroy, but a frightful partisan of an English ministry, 
whose base passions he indulges — whose unworthy resentments he grati- 
fies, and on whose behalf he at present canvasses." 

"Well, gentlemen, and did he not canvass on belialf of the 
ministry? Was there a titled or untitled servant of the Cas- 
tle who was not despatched to the south to vote against the 
popular, and for the ministerial candidates? Was there a 
single individual within the reach of his Grace that did not 
vote against Prittie and Matthew, in Tipperary, and against 
Hutchinson, in Cork ? I have brought with me some of the 
newspapers of the day, in which this partisanship in the Lord 
Lieutenant is treated by Mr. Hutchinson in language so strong 
and so pointed, that the words of this pubhcatiou are mildness 
and softness itself, when compared with that language. I shaU 
not read them for you, because I should fear that you may 
imagine I unnecessarily identified my cUent with the violent 
but the merited reprobation poured upon the scandalous inter- 
ference of our government with those elections. 

I need not, I am sure, tell you that any interference by the 
Lord Lieutenant with the purity of the election of members 
to serve in Parhament, is highly unconstitutional, and highly 
criminal ; he is doubly bound to the most strict neutrahty ; 
first, as a peer, the law prohibits his interference ; secondly, 
as a representative of the crown, his interference in elections 
is an usurpation of the people's rights ; it is, in substance and 
effect, high treason against the people, and its mischiefs are 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 105 

not the less by reason of there being no punishment affixed by 
the law to this treason. 

If this offence, gentlemen, be of daily occurrence — if it be 
frequently committed, it is upon that account only the more 
destructive to our liberties, and, therefore, requires the more 
loud, direct, and frequent condemnation : indeed, if such 
practices be permitted to prevail, there is an end of every 
remnant of freedom ; our boasted constitution becomes a 
mockery and an object of ridicule, and we ought to desire the 
manly simplicity of unmixed despotism. Will the Attorney- 
General — will his colleague, the Solicitor-General, deny that I 
have described this offence in its true colors? Will they 
attempt to deny the interference of the Duke of Richmond in 
the late elections ? I would almost venture to put your ver- 
dict upon this, and to consent to a conviction, if any person 
shall be found so stocked with audacity, as to presume pub- 
licly to deny the interference of his Grace in the late elec- 
tions, and his partisanship in favor of the ministerial candi- 
dates. Gentlemen, if that be denied, what will you, what can 
you think of the veracity of the man who denies it ? I fear- 
lessly refer the fact to you ; on that fact I build. This inter- 
ference is as notorious as the sun at noonday ; and who shall 
venture to deny that such interference is described by a soft 
term when it is called partisanship? He who uses the 
influence of the executive to control the choice of the repre- 
sentatives of the people, violates the first principles of the 
constitution, is guilty of political sacrilege, and profanes the 
very sanctuary of the people's rights and liberties ; and if he 
should not be called a partisan, it is only because some 
harsher and more appropriate term ought to be apphed to his 
deUnquency. 

I will recall to your minds an instance of violation of the 
constitution, which will illustrate tlie situation of my client, 
and the protection which, for your own sakes, you owe him. 
When, in 16S7, King James removed several Protestant rec- 
tors in Ireland from their churches, against law and justice, 
and illegally and unconstitutionally placed Roman Catholic 
clergymen in their stead, would any of you be content that he 
should be simply called a partisan ! No, gentlemen, my client 



106 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

aud I — Catliolic and Protestant though we be — agree per- 
fectly in this, that partisan would have been too mild a name 
for him, and that he should have been branded as a -violator 
of law, as an enemy to the constitution, and as a crafty tyrant 
who sought to gratify the prejudices of one part of his sub- 
jects that he might trample upon the liberties of all. And 
what, I would fain learn, could you think of the Attorney- 
General who prosecuted, or of the judge who condemned, or 
of the jury who convicted a printer for pubUshing to the 
world this tyranny — this gross violation of law and justice ? 
But how would your indignation be roused, if James had 
been only called a partisan, and for calling him a partisan a 
Popish jury had been packed, a Popish judge had been select- 
ed, and that the printer, who, you will admit, deserved ap- 
plause and reward, met condemnation and punishment. 

Of you — of you, shall this story be told, if you convict Mr. 
Magee. The Duke has interfered in elections ; he has violat- 
ed the liberties of the subject ; he has profaned the very tem- 
ple of the constitution ; and he, who has said that in so do- 
ing, he was a partisan, from your hands expects punishment. 

Compare the kindred offences ; James deprived the Protes- 
tant rectors of their Uvings ; he did not persecute, nor did he 
interfere with their rehgion; for tithes, and oblations, and 
glebes, and church lands, though sohd appendages to any 
church, are no part of the Protestant religion. The Protes- 
tant religion would, I presume — and for the honor of human 
nature I sincerely hope — continue its influence over the hu- 
man mind without the aid of those extrinsic advantages. Its 
pastors would, I trust and beheve, have remained true to their 
charge, without the adventitious benefits of temporal rewards ; 
and, like the Boman Cathohc Church, it might have shone 
forth a glorious example of firmness in rehgion, setting perse- 
cution at defiance. James did not attack the Protestant reh- 
gion ; I repeat it ; he only attacked the revenues of the Pro- 
testant church ; he violated the law and the constitution, in 
depriving men of that property, by his individual authority, 
to which they had precisely the same right with that by which 
he wore his crown. But is not the controlling the election of 
members of parhament a more dangerous violatioji of the con- 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 107 

stitution ? Does it not corrupt the very sources of legislation, 
and convert tlie guardians of the state into its plunderers ? 
The one was a direct and undisguised crime, capable of being 
redressed i,n the ordinary course of the law, and producing 
resistance by its open and plain violation of right and of law ; 
the other disguises itself in so many shapes, is patronized by 
so many high examples, and is followed by such perfect secu- 
rity, that it becomes the first duty of every man who possesses 
any reverence for the constitution, or any attachment to lib- 
erty, to lend all his efforts to detect, and, if possible, to pun- 
ish it. 

To any man who loved the constitution or freedom, I could 
safely appeal for my client's vindication ; or if any displeasure 
could be excited in the mind of such a man, it would arise be- 
cause of the forbearance and lenity of this publication. But 
the Duke is called a frightful partisan. Granted, gentlemen, 
granted. And is not the interference I have mentioned fright- 
ful ? Is it not terrific ? Who can contemplate it without shud- 
dering at the consequences which it is Hkely to produce ? What 
gentler phrase — what lady-like expression should my client 
use ? The constitution is sought to be violated, and he calls 
the author of that violation a frightful partisan. Eeally, gen- 
tlemen, the fastidiousness which would reject this expression 
would be better employed in preventing or punishing crime, 
than in dragging to a dungeon the man who has the manhness 
to adhere to truth, and to use it. BecoUect also — I cannot re- 
peat it too often — that the Attorney-General told you, that 
" the Hberty of the press was the best protection of the peo- 
ple against the government." Now, if the constitution be vio- 
lated — if the purity of election be disturbed by the executive, 
is not this precisely the case when this protection becomes 
necessary ? It is not wanted, nor can the press be called a 
protector, so long as the government is administered with 
fidehty, care, and skill. The protection of the press is requi- 
site only when integrity, dihgence, or judgment do not belong 
to the administration ; and that protection becomes the more 
necessary in the exact proportion in which these quahties are 
deficient. But, what protection can it afford if you convict in 
this instance ? For, by doing so, you will decide that nothing 



108 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

ouglit to be said against that want of honesty, or of attention, 
or of understanding ; the more necessary will the protection of 
the press become, the more unsafe will it be to pubhsh the 
truth ; and in the exact proportion in which the press might 
be useful, will it become hable to punishment. In short, ac- 
cording to the Attorney-General's doctrine, when the press is 
"best employed and wanted most," it will be most dangerous 
to use it. And thus, the more corrupt and profligate any ad- 
ministration may be, the more clearly can the pubhc prose- 
cutor ascertain the sacrifice of his selected victim. And call 
you this protection? Is this a protector who must be dis- 
armed the moment danger threatens, and is bound a prisoner 
the instant the fight has commenced ? 

Here I should close the case — here I should shortly recapi- 
tulate my client's defence, and leave him to your considera- 
tion; but I have been already too tedious, and shall do no 
more than recall to your recollection the purity, the integrity, 
the entu'e disinterestedness of Mr. Magee's motives. If money 
were his object, he could easily procure himself to be patron- 
ized and salaried ; but he prefers to be persecuted and dis- 
countenanced by the great and powerful, because they cannot 
deprive him of the certain expectation, that his exertions are 
useful to his long-suffering, ill-requited country. 

He is disinterested, gentlemen ; he is honest ; the Attorney- 
General admitted it, and actually took the trouble of adminis- 
tering to him advice how to amend his fortune, and save his 
person. But the advice only made his youthful blood mantle 
in that ingenuous countenance, and his reply was painted in 
the indignant look, that told the Attorney-General he might 
offer wealth, but he could not bribe — that he might torture, 
but he could not terrify ! Yes, gentlemen, firm in his honesty, 
and strong in the fervor of his love of Ireland, he fearlessly 
awaits your verdict, convinced that even you must respect the 
man whom you are called upon to condemn. Look to it, gen- 
tlemen ; consider whether an honest, disinterested man shall 
be prohibited from discussing public affairs ; consider whether 
all but flattery is to be silent — whether the discussion of the 
errors and the capacities of the ministers is to be closed for- 
ever. "Whether we are to be silent as to the crimes of former 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 109 

periods — tlie follies of the present, and the credulity of the 
future ; and, above all, reflect upon the demand that is made 
on you to punish the canvassing of abstract principles. 

Has the Attorney- General succeeded? Has he procured a 
jury so fitted to his object, as to be ready to bury in obhvion 
every fault and every crime, every error and every imperfection 
of public men, past, present, and future — and who shall, in ad- 
dition, silence any dissertation on the theory or principle of 
legislation ? Do, gentlemen, go this length with the prosecutor, 
and then venture on your oaths. I charge you to venture to 
talk to your families of the venerable hberty of the press — 
the protection of the people against the vices of the gov- 
ernment. 

I should conclude, but the Attorney-General compels me to 
follow him through another subject ; he has told you, and told 
you truly, that besides the matter set out in the indictment — 
the entire of which, gentlemen, we have already gone through — 
this publication contains severe strictures upon the alleged in- 
delicacy in the Chief Justice issuing a ministerial warrant, in 
a case which was afterwards to come before him judicially, 
and upon the manner in which the jury was attempted to be 
put together in Doctor Sheridan's case, and in which a jury 
was better arranged in the case of Mr. Kirwan. Indeed, the 
Attorney-General seemed much delighted with these topics ; 
he again burst out into an enraptured encomium upon himself ; 
and, as it were inspired by his subject, he rose to the dignity 
of a classical quotation, when he exclaimed : " Me, me, adsum, 
qui feci." He forgot to add the still more appropriate remain- 
der of the sentence, " mea fraus omnis !' 

"Yes, gentlemen, he has avowed with more manliness than 
discretion, that he was the contriver of all those measures. 
With respect to the warrant which his lordship issued in the 
stead of the ordinary justices of the peace, and upon a charge 
not amounting to any breach of the peace, I shall say nothing 
at present. An obvious dehcacy restrains me fi'om entering up- 
on that subject ; and as the interest of my chent does not coun- 
teract that delicacy, I shall refrain. But I would not have it 
understood that I have formed no opinion on the subject. 
Yes, I have formed an opinion, and a strong and decided 



110 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL, 

opinion, which I am ready to support as a lawyer and a mau, 
but the expression of which I now sacrifice to a plain dehcacy. 
But I must say, that the Attorney-General has thrown new 
light on this business ; he has given 'us information we did not 
possess before. I did not before know that the warrant was 
sought for and procured by the Attorney-General ; I thought 
it was the spontaneous act of his lordship, and not in conse- 
quence of any private sohcitation from the Attorney-General. 
In this respect, he has set me right — it is a fact of considera- 
ble value, and although the consequences to be deduced from 
it are not pleasing to any man, loving, as I do, the purity of 
justice, yet, I most heartily thank the Attorney-General for 
the fact — the important fact. 

His second avoAval relates to Dr. Sheridan. It really is 
comfortable to know how much of the indecent scene exhib- 
ited upon his trial belonged to the Attorney-General. He 
candidly tells us, that the obtrusion of the poHce magistrate, 
Sirr, as an assistant to the Crown-Solicitor, was the act of 
the king's Attorney-General. "Adsum qui feci," said he. 
Thus he avows that he procured an Orangeman — I do not ex- 
actly understand what is meant by an Orangeman — some of 
you could easily tell me — that he caused this Orangeman to 
stand in open court, next to the Solicitor for the Crown, with 
his written paper, suggesting who were fit jurors for his pur- 
pose, and who should be put by. Gentlemen, he avows that 
this profligate scene was acted in the open court, by his direc- 
tions. It was by the Attorney-General's special dii'ections, 
then, that such men as John Lindsay, of Sackville street, and 
John Koche, of Strand street, were set aside ; the latter, be- 
cause, though amongst the most wealthy and respectable mer- 
chants in your city, he is a Papist ; and the other, because, 
although a Protestant, he is tainted with Hberahty — the only 
offence, pubHc or private, that could be attributed to him. 
Yes, such men as these were set aside by the Attorney-Gene- 
ral's aid-de camp, the salaried justice of the police office. 

The next avowal is also precious. This pubhcatiou contains 
also a commentary on the Castle-list jury that convicted Mr. 
Kirwan, and the Attorney-General has also avowed his share 
in that transaction ; he thus suppHes the only h'nk we wanted 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. Ill 

in our chain of evidence, when we challenged the array upon 
that trial. If we could have proved that which the Attorney- 
General with his " adsum qui feci," yesterday admitted, we 
should have succeeded and got rid of that panel. Even now, 
it is deUghtful to understand the entire machinery, and one 
now sees at once the reason why Sir Charles Saxton was not 
examined on the part of the crown, in reply to the case we 
made. He would, you now plainly see, have traced the ar- 
rangement to the Attorney-General, and the array must have 
been quashed. Thus in the boasting humor of this Attorney- 
General, he has brought home to himself personally, that 
which we attributed to him only in his official capacity, and 
he has convicted the man of that which we charged only upon 
the office. 

He has, he must have a motive for this avowal ; if he had 
not an adequate object in view, he would not have thus un- 
necessarily and wantonly taken upon himself all the reproach 
of those transactions. He would not have boasted of having, 
out of court, sohcited an extra-judicial opinion, in the form of 
a warrant from his lordship; he would not have gloried in 
employing an Orangeman from the pohce office to assist him 
in open court, with instructions in writing how to pack his 
juiy ; still less would he have suffered it to be believed that he 
was a party at the Castle, with the Acting Secretary of State, 
to the arrangement of the jury that was afterwards to try a 
person prosecuted by the state. 

He would not have made this, I must say, disgraceful avowal, 
unless he were influenced by an adequate motive. I can easily 
tell you what that motive was. He knew your prejudices — he 
knew your antipathy — alas ! your interested antipathy — to the 
Cathohcs, and, therefore, in order to induce you to convict a 
Protestant of a Hbel for a pubhcation, innocent, if not useful 
in itseK, in order to procure that conviction from your party 
feehngs and your prejudices, which he despaired of obtaining 
from your judgments, he vaimts himself to you as the mighty 
destroyer of the hopes of Popish petitioners — as a man capa- 
ble of every act withia, as without the profession, to prevent or 
impede any rehef to the Papists. In short, he wishes to show 
himseK to you as an active partisan at your side ; and upon 



112 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

tliose merits he who knows you best, claims jour verdict — a 
verdict wliich must be given in on your oaths, and attested by 
and in the name of the God of all Christians. 

For my part I frankly avow that I shudder at these scenes ; 
I cannot, without horror, view this interfering and intermed- 
dling with judges and juries, and my abhorrence must be aug- 
mented, when I find it avowed, that the actors in all these sad 
exhibitions were the mere puppets of the Attorney-General, 
moved by his wires, and performing under his control. It is 
in vain to look for safety to person or property, whilst this 
system is allowed to pervade our courts ; the very fountain of 
justice may be corrupted at its source, and those waters which 
should confer health and vigor throughout the land, can then 
diffuse nought but mephitic and pestilential vapors to disgust 
and to destroy. If honesty, if justice be silent, yet prudence 
ought to check these practices. We live in a new era — a mel- 
ancholy era, in which perfidy and profligacy are sanctioned by 
high authority ; the base violation of plighted faith, the deep 
stain of dishonor, infidehty in love, treachery in friendship, the 
abandonment of every principle, and the adoption of every 
frivolity and of every vice that can excite hatred combined 
with ridicule — all — all this, and more, may be seen around us ; 
and yet it is beheved, it is expected, that this system is fated 
to be eternal. Gentlemen, we shall all weep the insane delu- 
sion ; and in the terrific moments of altercation you know not, 
you cannot know, how soon or how bitterly the ingredients 
of your own poisoned chaHce may be commended to your own 
lips. 

With these views around us — Avith these horrible prospects 
lying obscurely before us — ^in sadness and in sorrow, party 
feehngs may find a sohtary consolation. My heart feels a 
species of relief when I recollect that not one single Roman 
Catholic has been found suited to the Attorney- General's pur- 
pose. With what an affectation of liberality would he have 
placed, at least, one Eoman Cathohc on his juries, if he 
could have found one Roman Catholic gentleman in this city 
capable of being managed into fitness for those juries. You 
well know that the very first merchants of this city, in wealth 
as well as in character, are Catholics. Some of you serve oc- 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 113 

casionally on special juries in important cases of private prop- 
erty. Have you ever seen one of those special juries without 
many Catholics? — frequently a majority — seldom less than 
one-haK of CathoHcs. Why are Cathohcs excluded from these 
state juries? Who shall venture to avow the reason? Oh, 
for the partisan indiscretion that would blindly avow the rea- 
son ! It is, in truth, a high comphment, which persecution, in 
spite of itself, pays to independent integrity. 

It is, in fact, a comphment. It is intended for a reproach, 
for a hbel. It is meant to insinuate that such a man, for ex- 
ample, as Eandall M'Donnell — the pride and boast of com- 
merce — one of the first contributors to the revenues of the 
state, and the first in all the sweet charities of social hfe — 
would refuse to do justice, upon his oath, to the crown, and 
perjure himself in a state trial, because he is a Eoman Catho- 
Hc. You, even you, would be shocked, if any man were so 
audacious as to assert, in words, so foul a libel, so false a cal- 
umny ; and yet what does the conduct of ihe Attorney-Gene- 
ral amount to ? Why, practically, to just such a hbel, to pre- 
cisely such a calumny. He acts a part which he would not 
venture to speak, and endeavors silently to inflict a censure 
which no man could be found so devoid of shame as to assert 
in words. And here, gentlemen, is a libel for which there is 
no punishment ; here is a profligate calumny for which the law 
furnishes no redress ; he can continue to calumniate us by his 
rejection. See whether he does not offer you a greater insult 
by his selection ; lay your hands to your hearts, and in pri- 
vate communion with yourselves, ask the reason why you 
have been sought for and selected for this jury — will you 
discover that you have been selected because of admitted 
impartiaUty ? 

Would to God you could make that discovery ! It would 
be one on which my chent might build the certain expecta- 
tion of a triumphal acquittal. 

Let me transport you from the heat and fury of domestic poH- 
tics ; let me place you in a foreign land ; you are Protestants ; 
with your good leave, you shall for a moment be Portuguese, 
and Portuguese is now an honorable name, for right well have 
the people of Portugal fought for their country, against the 



114 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

foreign invader. Oh, liow easy to procure a similar spirit, and 
more of bravery, amongst the people of Ireland ! The slight 
purchase of good words, and a kindly disposition, would con- 
vert them into an impenetrable guard for the safety of the 
Tin-one and the State. But advice and regTet are equally 
unavailing, and they are doomed to calumny and oppression, 
the reahty of persecution, and the mockery of justice, until 
some fatal hour shall arrive, which may preach wisdom to the 
dupes, and menace with punishment the oppressor. 

In the meantime I must place you in Portugal. Let us 
suppose for an instant that the Protestant religion is that of 
the people of Portugal — the Cathohc that of the government 
— that the house of Braganza has not reigned, but that Por- 
tugal is still governed by the viceroy of a foreign nation, from 
whom no kindness, no favor has ever flowed, and from whom 
justice has rarely been obtained, and upon those unfrequent 
occasions, not conceded generously, but extorted by force, or 
wrung from distress by terror and apprehension, in a stinted 
measure and ungracious manner ; you, Protestants, shall form, 
not, as with us in Ireland, nine tenths, but some lesser num- 
ber — ^you shall be only four fifths of the population ; and aU the 
persecution which you have yourselves practiced here upon Pa- 
pists, whilst you, at the same time, accused the Papists of the 
crime of being persecutors, shall glow around ; your native 
land shall be to you the country of strangers ; you shall be 
ahens in the soil that gave you bhth, and whilst eveiy for- 
eigner may, in the land of your forefathers, attain rank, sta- 
tion, emolument, honors, you alone shall be excluded ; and 
you shall be excluded for no other reason but a conscientious 
abhorrence to the rehgion of your ancestors. 

Only think, gentlemen, of the scandalous injustice of pun- 
ishing you because you are Protestants ! With what scorn, 
with what contempt do you not hsten to the stale pretences — 
to the miserable excuses by which, under the name of state 
reasons and political arguments, your exclusion and de- 
gradation are sought to be justified. Your reply is ready : 
"Perform your iniquity — men of crimes (you exclaim) be un- 
just — punish us for our fidelity and honest adherence to truth, 
but insult us not by supposing that your reasoning can impose 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 115 

u]3on a single individual either of us or of yourselves." In 
this situation let me give you a viceroy ; he shall be a man 
who may be styled — by some persons disposed to exaggerate, 
beyond bounds, his merits, and to flatter him more than 
enough — " an honorable man and a respectable soldier," but 
in point of fact, he shall be of that little-minded class of beings 
who are suited to be the plaything of knaves — one of those 
men who imagine they govern a nation, whilst in reahty they 
are but the instruments upon which the crafty play with safety 
and with profit. Take such a man for your viceroy — Protes- 
tant Portuguese. We shall begin with making this tour from 
Tralos Montes to the kingdom of Algesiras — as one amongst 
us should say, from the Giant's Causeway to the kingdom of 
Kerry. Upon his tour he shall affect great candor and good 
will to the poor suffering Protestants. The bloody anniver- 
saries of the inquisitorial triumphs of former days shall be for 
a season abandoned, and over our inherent hostility the garb 
of hypocrisy shall for a season be thrown. Enmity to the 
Protestants shall become, for a moment, less apparent ; but it 
will be only the more odious for the transitory disguise. 

The delusion of the hour having served its purpose, your 
viceroy shows himself in his native colors ; he selects for 
office, and prefers for his pension-Hst, the men miserable in 
intellect, if they be but virulent against the Protestants ; to 
rail against the Protestant reUgion — to turn its hohest rites 
into ridicule — to slander the individual Protestants, are the 
surest, the only means to obtain his favor and patronage. He 
selects from his Popish bigots some being more canine than 
human, who, not having talents to sell, brings to the market 
of bigotry his impudence — ^who, with no quality under heaven 
but gross, vulgar, acrimonious, disgustful and shameless abuse 
of Protestantism to recommend him, shall be promoted to 
some accountant-generalship, and shall riot in the spoils of 
the people he traduces, as it were to crown with insult the 
severest injuries. This viceroy selects for his favorite privy 
councillor some learned doctor, half lawyer, haK divine, an 
entire brute, distinguished by the unblushing repetition of 
calumnies against the Protestants. This man has asserted 
that Protestants are perjurers and murderers in principle — 



116 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

that they keep no faith with Papists, but hold it lawful and 
meritorious to violate every engagement, and comroit eveiy 
atrocity towards any person who happens to differ with Pro- 
testants in rehgious behef. This man raves thus, in public, 
against the Protestants, and has turned his ravings into large 
personal emoluments. But whilst he is the oracle of minor 
bigots, he does not believe himself ; he has selected for the 
partner of his tenderest joys, of his most ecstatic moments — 
he has chosen for the intended mother of his children, for the 
sweetener and solace of his every care, a Protestant, gentle- 
men of the jury. 

Next to the vile instruments of bigotry, his accountant-gen- 
eral and privy councillor, we will place his acts. The Protes- 
tants of Portugal shall be exposed to insult and slaughter ; an 
Orange party — a party of Popish Orangemen, shall be sup- 
posed to exist; they shall have hberty to slaughter the un- 
armed and defenceless Protestants, as they sit peaceably 
at their firesides. They shall be let loose in some Portuguese 
district called Monaghan; they shall cover the streets of 
some Portuguese town of Belfast with human gore; and in 
the metropohs of Lisbon, the Protestant widow shall have 
her harmless child murdered in the noonday, and his blood 
shall have flowed unrequited, because his assassin was very 
loyal when he was drunk, and had an irresistible propensity 
to signalize his loyalty by killing Protestants. Behold, gen- 
tlemen, this viceroy depriving of command, and staying the 
promotion of, every mihtary man who shall dare to think Pro- 
testants men, or who shall presume to suggest that they ought 
not to be prosecuted. Behold this viceroy promoting and 
rewarding the men who insulted and attempted to degrade 
the first of your Protestant nobihty. Behold him in pubKc, 
the man I have described. 

In his personal concerns he receives an enormous revenue 
from the people he thus misgoverns. See in his management 
of that revenue a parsimony at which even his enemies blush. 
See the paltry sum of a single joe refused to any Protestant 
charity, whilst his bounty is unknown even at the Popish 
institutions for benevolent purposes. See the most wasteful 
expenditm-e of the public money — every job patronized — 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 117 

every profligacy encouraged. See tlie resources of Portugal 
diminislied. See lier discords and her internal feuds increased. 
And, lastly, behold the course of justice perverted and cor- 
rupted. 

It is thus, gentlemen, the Protestant Portuguese seek to 
obtain rehef by humble petition and supplication. There can 
be no crime surely for a Protestant oppressed, because he fol- 
lows a rehgion which is, in his opinion, true, to endeavor to 
obtain reUef by mildly representing to his Popish oppressors, 
that it is the right of every man to worship the Deity accord- 
ing to the dictates of his own conscience ; to state respect- 
fully to the governing powers that it is unjust, and may be 
highly impohtic to punish men, merely because they do not 
profess Popery, which they do not beUeve; and to submit, 
with all humiUty, that to lay the bm^dens of the state equally, 
and distribute its benefits partially, is not justice, but, 
although sanctioned by the pretence of religious zeal, is, in 
truth, iniquity, and palpably criminal. Well, gentlemen, for 
daring thus to remonstrate, the Protestants are persecuted. 
The first step in the persecution is to pervert the plain mean- 
ing of the Portuguese language, and a law prohibiting any 
disguise in apparel, shall be appHed to the ordinary dress of 
the individual ; it reminds one of pretence and purpose. 

To carry on these persecutions, the viceroy chooses for his 
first inquisitor the descendant of some Popish refugee — some 
man with an hereditary hatred to Protestants ; he is not the 
son of an Irishman, this refugee inquisitor — no, for the fact is 
notorious, that the Irish refugee Papists were ever distin- 
guished for their hberality, as well as for their gallantry in the 
field and talent in the cabinet. This inquisitor shall be, gen- 
tlemen, a descendant from one of those Enghsh Papists, who 
was the dupe or contriver of the Gunpowder Plot! With 
such a chief inquisitor, can you conceive anything more cal- 
culated to rouse you to agony than the solemn mockery .of 
your trial? This chief inquisitor begins by influencing the 
judges out of court ; he proceeds to inquire out fit men. for his 
interior tribunal, which, for brevity, we will call a jury. He 
selects his juries from the most violent of the Popish 
Orangemen of the city, and procures a conviction against law 



118 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

and common sense, and without evidence. Have you followed 
me, gentlemen? Do you enter into the feelings of Protes- 
tants thus insulted, thus oppressed, thus persecuted — their 
enemies and traducers promoted, and encom-aged, and richly 
rewarded — their friends discountenanced and displaced — their 
persons unprotected, and their characters assailed by hired 
calumniators — their blood shed with impunity — their revenues 
parsimoniously spared to accumulate for the individual, waste- 
fully squandered for the state — the emblems of discord, the 
war-cry of disunion, sanctioned by the highest authority, and 
Justice herself converted from an impartial arbitrator into a 
frightful partisan ? 

Yes, gentlemen, place yourselves as Protestants under such 
a persecution. Behold before you this chief inquisitor, with 
his prejudiced tribunal — this gambler, with a loaded die ; and 
now say what are your feelings — what are your sensations of 
disgust, abhorrence, affright ? But if at such a moment some 
ardent and enthusiastic Papist, regardless of his interests, 
and roused by the crimes that were thus committed against 
you, should describe, in measured, and cautious, and cold lan- 
guage, scenes of oppression and iniquity — if he were to de- 
scribe them, not as I have done, but in feeble and mild lan- 
guage, and simply state the facts for your benefit and the 
instruction of the public — if this Uberal Papist, for this, were 
dragged to the Inquisition, as for a crime, and menaced with 
a dungeon for years, good and gracious God ! how would you 
revolt and abominate the men who could consign him to that 
dungeon ! "With what an eye of contempt, and hatred, and 
despair, would you not look at the packed and profligate tri- 
bunal, which could direct punishment against him who de- 
served rewards ! What pity would you not feel for the advo- 
cate who, heavily and without hope, labored in his defence ! 
and with what agonized and frenzied despair would you not 
look to the future destinies of a land in which perjury was 
organized and from which humanity and justice had been for 
ever banished ! 

With this picture of yourselves in Portugal, come home to us 
in Ireland, say is that a crime, when applied to Protestants, 
which is a vu-tue and a merit when applied to Papists ? Be- 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF JOHN MAGEE. 119 

hold how we suffer here ; and then reflect, that it is princi- 
pally by reason of your prejudices against us that the Attor- 
ney-General hopes for your verdict. The good man has talked 
of his impartiality ; he will suppress, he says, the licentious- 
ness of the press. I have, I hope, shown you the right of my 
cKent to discuss the public subjects which he has discussed in 
the manner they are treated of in the publication before you, 
yet he is prosecuted. Let me read for you a paragraph which 
the Attorney-General has not prosecuted — which he has re- 
fused to prosecute : 

Balltbay, July 4, 1813. 

" A meeting of tlie Orange Lodges was agreed on, in consequence of the 
manner in which the Catholics wished to have persecuted the loyahsts in 
this county last year, when they even murdered some of them for no 
other reason than their being yeomen and Protestants." 

And, again — 

"It was at Ballybay that the Catholics murdered one Hughes, a yeo- 
man sergeant, for being a Protestant, as was given in evidence at the 
assizes by a Catholic witness. " 

I have read this passage from the Hibernian Journal of the 
7th of this month. I know not whether you can hear, un- 
moved, a paragraph which makes my blood boil to read ; but 
I shall only tell you, that the Attorney-General refused to 
prosecute this hbeller. Gentlemen, there have been several 
murders committed in the County of Monaghan, in which Bal- 
lybay hes. The persons killed happened to be Roman Catho- 
hcs ; their murderers are Orangemen. Several of the persons 
accused of these murders are to be tried at the ensuing assizes. 
The agent apphed to me personally, with this newspaper ; he 
stated that the obvious intention was to create a prejudice 
upon the approaching trials favorable to the murderers, and 
against the prosecutors. He stated what you — even you — 
will easUy beheve, that there never was a falsehood more flagi- 
tiously destitute of truth than the entire paragraph. I advised 
him, gentlemen, to wait on the Attorney-General in the most 
respectful manner possible ; to show him this paragraph, then 
to request to be allowed to satisfy him as to the utter false- 
hood of the assertions wj^ich this paragraph contained, which 
could be more easily done, as the judges who went thafc cu'cuit 



120 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'COKNELL. 

coiild prove part of it to be false ; and I directed him to en- 
treat tliat the Attorney-General, when fully satisfied of the 
falsehood, would prosecute the pubhsher of this, which, I 
think, I may call an atrocious libel. 

Gentlemen, the Attorney-General was accordingly waited 
on ; he was respectfully requested to prosecute upon the terms 
of having the falsehood of these assertions first proved to him. 
I need not tell you he refused. These are not the hbellers he 
prosecutes. Gentlemen, this not being a hbel on any indi\i- 
dual, no private individual can prosecute for it ; and the Attor- 
ney-General turns his press loose on the CathoHcs of the 
county of Monaghan, whilst he virulently assails Mr. Magee 
for what must be admitted to be comparatively mild and inof- 
fensive. 

No, gentlemen, he does not prosecute this hbel. On the 
contrary, this paper is paid enormous sums of the pubhc 
money. There are no less than five proclamations in the pa- 
per containing this libel ; and it was proved in my presence, 
in a court of justice, that, besides the proclamations and pub- 
lic advertisements, the two proprietors of the paper had each 
a pension of £400 per annum, for supporting government, as 
it was called. Since that period one of those proprietors has 
got an office worth, at least, .£800 a year ; and the sou of the 
other, a place of upwards of £400 per annum : so that, as it is 
likely that the original pensions continue, here may be an an- 
nual income of X2,000 paid for this paper, besides the thousands 
of pounds annually, which the insertion of the proclamations 
and public advei-tisements cost. It is a paper of the very 
lowest and most paltry scale of talent, and its circulation is, 
fortunately, very limited ; but it receives several thousands of 
pounds of the money of the men whom it foully and falsely 
calumniates, 

"Would I could see the man who pays this proclamation 
money and these pensions at the Castle. [Here Mr. O'Con- 
nell turned round to where Mr. Peele, Chief Secretary to the 
Lord Lieutenant, sat.] "Would I could see the man who, 
against the fact, asserted that the proclamations were inserted 
in aU. the papers, save in tliose whose proprietors were con- 
victed of a hbel. I would ask him whether this be a paper 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OP JOHN MAGEE. 121 

tliat ought to receive the money of the Irish people ? — whether 
this be the legitimate use of the public purse ? And when you 
find this calumniator salaried and rewarded, whore is the im- 
partiahty, the justice, or even the decency of prosecuting Mr. 
Magee for a hbel, merely because he has not praised public 
men, and has discussed pubhc affairs in the spirit of freedom 
and of the constitution ? Contrast the situation di Mr. Magee 
with the proprietor of the Hibernian Journal ; the one is prose- 
cuted with aU the weight and influence of the crown, the other 
pensioned by the ministers of the crown ; the one dragged to 
your bar for the sober discussion of political topics, the other 
hired to disseminate the most horrid calumnies ! Let the At- 
torney-General now boast of his impartiality ; can you credit 
him on your oaths ? Let him talk of his veneration for the 
Hberty of the press ; can you beheve him in your consciences? 
Let him call the press the protection of the people against the 
government. Yes, gentlemen, believe him when he says so. 
Let the press be the protection of the people ; he admits that 
it ought to be so. Will you find a verdict for him, that shall 
contradict the only assertion upon which he and I, however, 
are both agreed ? 

Gentlemen, the Attorney-General is bound by this admis- 
sion ; it is part of his case, and he is the prosecutor here ; 
it is a part of the evidence before you, for he is ' the prose- 
cutor. Then, gentlemen, it is your duty to act upon that evi- 
dence, and to allow the press to afford some protection to the 
people. 

Is there amongst you any one friend to freedom ? Is there 
amongst you one man, who esteems equal and impartial jus- 
tice, who values the people's rights as the foundation of pri- 
vate happiness, and who considers life as no boon without 
liberty? Is there amongst you one friend to the constitu- 
tion — one man who hates oppression ? If there be, Mr. 
Magee appeals to his kindred mind, and confidently expects 
an acquittal. 

There are amongst you men of great rehgious zeal — of much 
public piety. Are you sincere ? Do you beheve what you pro- 
fess ? With all this zeal — with all this piety, is there any con- 
science amongst you? Is there any terror of violating j'our 



122 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

oatlis ? Be ye hypocrites, or does genuine religion inspire you? 
If you be sincere — if you liave conscience — if your oatlis can 
control your interests, then Mr. Magee confidently expects an 
acquittal. 

If amongst you there be cherished one ray of pure rehgion — 
if amongst you there glow a single spark of Hberty — if I have 
alarmed rehgion, or roused the spirit of freedom in one breast 
amongst you, Mr. Magee is safe, and his country is served ; but 
if there be none — if you be slaves and hypocrites, he will await 
your verdict, and despise it. 



SPEECH IN THE BEITISH CATHOLIC ASSOCIA- 
TION, ON THE DEFEAT OF THE E^IANCIPATION 
BILL, MAY 26, 1825. 



The measure of which we complained is of too recent a date, 
the injury which we have sustained is yet too fresh, too gall- 
ing in its effects, to allow my reason to assume the ascendant 
over my feelings, and to give my judgment time to operate on, 
and influence the tenor of my reflections. I shall neverthe- 
less be as respectful in my allusions, and as moderate in the 
remarks I have to offer, as the overboihng fervency of my 
Ii'ish blood win permit. By rejecting that bill which the 
Commons had sent up to them for their concurrence and ap- 
proval, the House of Lords has inflicted a vital injury on the 
stabihty of Enghsh power, and on Irish feelings and Irish 
honesty. They, however, would not be cast down by that 
injury. The Cathohcs were sometimes in derision termed " Ro- 
man." I am a Catholic, and proud am I to say that in one 
thing at least I am a Roman — I never will despair. But on 
what is this boastful assertion founded ? Why should I say 
that which I feel has not reason or sound policy to support it? 
"Where now, I would ask, is there a rational hope for a Catho- 
lic ? Where shall I look for consolation under the present 
great and serious disappointment? Am I to look back? 
Alas ! there is nothing cheering in the events wliich have for 



ON THE DEFEAT OF THE EMANCIPATION BILL, 123 

some time past met us on the way to success and dashed our 
hopes to the earth. Does history furnish any grounds for 
the supposition that those who have been found incapable of 
maintaining their phghted faith, and preserving the terms of 
a great national contract, will now, in the hour of success, be 
induced to yield any reason, any inducement to us to proceed 
in the course we have adopted ? Is this, I would ask, the ex- 
ample the Irish Catholics gave, when they had on two occa- 
sions come into power ? Did they, in the reign of Mary, seek 
by retaliation to avenge the blood of their slaughtered ances- 
tors ? No ! thank God, they did not ! and that at least was 
one triumphant consideration. Not one drop of Protestant 
blood had been shed — not one particle of Protestant property 
had been then sacrificed. In the reign of James II. the 
Catholics again came into power, and their conduct was 
marked by the same spirit of forbearance. I have heard it 
justly stated in the House of Commons — no, I must not say 
that, but I saw it in the newspapers, in the powerful speech of 
Mr. Twiss, which was distinguished alike for vigor of thought, 
strength of reasoning, and historical accuracy, that in the 
reign of James there were but fourteen Protestants in the 
House of Commons, and eight or ten in {he House of Lords ; 
the rest were Catholics. Were Protestants excluded from it 
bylaw? No, the people returned both Protestants and Catho- 
Hcs ; and no one then stood up to say that a man should not 
be permitted to sit in parliament unless he heard Mass and 
attended auricular confession. No, no, it was left to their 
enemies to say that Cathohcs should not be admitted there, 
for the sacrifice of the Mass was impious and idolatrous. 

[Mr. O'Connell then attended to a statement made by Mr. Daw- 
son, who thought fit to attribute persecution to the Irish Catholics 
in the reign of the second James, on the authority of Archbishop 
King, who was refuted by Eev. Dr. Leslie, and yet, ia 1825, is 
quoted in parliament to convict the Catholics of Ireland. He next 
entered into a brief history and defence of the Irish Catholic Asso- 
ciation, and reprobated the penal act which extinguished that body.] 

I call on the Cathohcs of England to co-operate with those 
of Leland for the repeal of this act, for it is a step to return 



124: SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

to the old penal law ; and how can I tell the people of Ireland 
they ought to be tranquil, and not ferment in their hearts that 
black stuff which makes political discontent mischievous — that 
fire suppressed, that explodes only the more dangerously on 
account of the compression that has withheld it ? How can 
I tell the people of Ireland to hope, when they see this un- 
principled, disastrous measure has been adopted ? I confess 
I do find ground for hope in the things called arguments which 
are employed against us, if I had not seen any in the records 
of ancient history, in the violation of treaties, and the recent 
case of the suppression of the Cathohc Association. I begin 
with the first in dignity, the keeper of the King's English con- 
science ; for the King, my lord, has three consciences — ^he has 
an English conscience, and the keeper of it is a hberal, and 
turns to the liberal side of it ; he has an Irish conscience, and 
I hope the keeper of it will very soon be a liberal person, and 
he win turn to the liberal side of it ; and his Majesty, my lord, 
has a Hanoverian conscience ; that conscience is in his own 
keeping ; it has no contradicting colors or differing sides — it 
is all liberality and justice. Who cannot see that the guilt of 
refusing that to us which the Eng personally gives to his 
Hanoverian subjects, lies in the miserable machinery of a 
boroughmongering administration, which prevents the King 
from doing justice to aU ? 

There were two other objections against us. I thank the 
quarter from which they come : I thank him sincerely for the 
first of them, for I must unaffectedly admit its truth and jus- 
tice, and I will abide the event of it fairly. It was this — if 
you emancipate the Catholics, said the Lord Chancellor, you 
must equally give Hberty of conscience to all classes of Dissent- 
ers. I thank you heartily, my Lord Eldon; that is exactly 
what we say ; our petition is that ; — we do not come before 
parliament, making a comparison of theological doctrines : we 
revere our own ; we are not indifferent to them ; we know their 
awful importance, but we say liberty of conscience is a 
sacred right. [A voice from the crowd : " You have it."] 
I thank the gentleman whose voice I hear. You, my Lord 
Duke, possess libert}^ of conscience. Ai-e you not the pre- 
mier peer of England — could any one deprive you of that 



ON THE DEFEAT OP THE EMANCIPATION BILL. 125 

right ? Could the King iipon his throne, or the Chancellor on 
his bench, make any decree against it, if your conscience per- 
mitted ? There is such a liberty of conscience as that alluded 
to in Spain, where every man is at liberty to be of the religion 
of the ruling power ; but now that Ferdinand is returned, no 
man is allowed to dissent from that rehgion ; and let me not 
be brought to prefer the Cortes to him. They trod upon the 
Church, and threw away the people, and deserved to lose their 
power. The Dissenters have it not, for neither Smith, of Nor- 
wich, nor "Wilks, the Secretary of that excellent Association for 
Liberty of Conscience (who published in their own, my creed on 
that subject), they could not fill an office in any corporation, for 
the moment they were proposed, the opposite candidate would 
tell them, "You have not taken the sacramental test," and the 
election would be void, and the candidate who had fewest 
votes would be returned. This was good and fair reason to 
hope that the principle is calculated, in spite of miserable big- 
otry and individual acrimony, to make its way all over Eng- 
land. The hberal portion of th-e Dissenters are with ns. I 
find, therefore, reason to hope. Liberty of conscience is our 
principle, and even in despair I would retain it ; for I am con- 
fident that force may make hypocrites, but not true believers — 
it may compel outward profession, but it is not in man's power 
to change the heart ; and because I know that force is always 
resorted to by him that thinks he has the worst of the argu- 
ment. But, for my part, being conscientiously convinced of 
the superiority of the Cathohc religion over every other — and 
putting it to this awful test of sincerity, that I know an eter- 
nity depends upon it — with that awful conviction, all I ask of 
my Protestant brethren, who beheve their own religion to be 
the best, is, that they would give the same practical proof of 
their conviction of its superiority. Let them give their reli- 
gion what I ask for mine — a clear stage and no favor, and let 
the advantage be decided by conscientious men and the will 
of the eternal God. 

Another argument of the Lord Chancellor was — it seemed, 
indeed, rather a word than an argument — that this was a Pro- 
testant constitution, and the words " Protestant constitution " 
came out very frequently. This was rather an assertion than an 



126 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

argument, and it lias this defect as an assertion, that it happens, 
mj lord, not to be time. There are four descendants amongst 
the Catholic nobihty of the day of the barons who extorted 
Magna Charta from a tyrant. It was Catholics who instituted 
the hereditary succession in the House of Lords as a separate 
House : it was Catholics who instituted the representation of 
the people in the House of Commons : it was Cathohcs who 
instituted trial by jury, standing as a shield between the peo- 
ple and power, making the administration of the law a domes- 
tic concern, and preventing any man giving a false and flagi- 
tious verdict to-day in favor of despotism, lest he himself should 
be the victim the next. Are not these ingredients in the con- 
stitution ? I would not forget the treason law of Edward III., 
which is the perfection of wisdom in that respect, for many 
and many a victim would have been sent to prematui'e death 
and destruction but for the advantage of that Catholic statute 
of Edward III. ; and whenever despotism has ruled over this 
country, the first step that has been taken, from time to time, 
and it was one which immediately followed the Reformation, 
was to repeal that CathoHc statute, and deprive the people of 
its benefits. We have it now; but though we have it now 
through its being restored by a Protestant parhament, it was 
di-awn up by Catholic hands, it was passed by Catholic votes, 
it was signed by a Cathohc King, and will Lord Eldon teU me 
that the treason law, the trial by jury, the House of Lords, 
and the office of Chancellor, too, are no portions of this Pro- 
testant constitution ? If that office did not exist, I suspect 
that the Protestantism of the Chancellor would not be so 
extremely vivid as it is at present. The seals he bears, the 
mace which is carried before him, were borne by, and carried 
before many and many a Catholic bishop ; and the first lay- 
man who held them was the martyred Sir Thomas More, who, 
as it was weU said in parliament, left the office with ten pounds 
ill his pocket ; a Catholic example to the present Protestant 
Chancellor. 

Protestant constitution ! "What is it, if money be not one of 
the valuable concerns of the constitution ? Will the Chancel- 
lor say it is not ? "^ If the constitution be Protestant, let the 
Protestants pay the tithes and the taxes ; let them pay the 



ON THE DEFEAT OP THE EMANCIPATION BILL. 127 

cliurcli rates and the Grand Jury cess for us in Ireland. If 
it be a Protestant constitution let it be so entirely : let us not 
have to fight their battles or pay their taxes. This is the ad- 
mirable and inimitable equity of the Lord Chancellor. Here 
is the keeper of a conscience for you ! Here is a distributor 
of equity. It shall be Protestant to the extent of everything 
that is valuable and useful : to the extent of everything that 
is rewarding and dignified ; for every place of emolument and 
authority, and everything that elevates a man, and is the 
recompense of legitimate ambition. To this extent it shall be 
Protestant ; but for the burdens of the state — ^for the shedding 
of human blood in defence of the throne — for all that bears 
on a man, even to the starvation of his family by the weight 
of taxation which so few are able to pay in this country, and 
by which so many have been reduced to poverty in Ireland *" 
(for have I not seen the miserable blanket, and the single po- 
tato pot, sold by the tax-gatherer in my native country ?) Oh, 
shall I, I say, be told that for all that is useful the constitu- 
tion shall be Protestant, and that it shall cease to be so the 
moment there is anything of oppression, money-making, 
grinding, or taxation ? Is it just to take the entire value and 
give no valuable consideration in return ? Is it just to accept 
labor and pay no wages ? Is this equity in the High Court 
of Chancery? Prom your tribimal I appeal to the living 
God, who shall judge us all, and in his presence I proclaim / 
the foul iniquity, the barefaced injustice of loading us with ' 
all the burdens of the state, and keeping us from its advan- [ 
tages. 

After the Chancellor I would refer to the speech of a right 
Reverend Bishop, which was said to have been sonorous, mu- 
sical and weU delivered — highly pleasing to his party. It 
reminded him of a story told by Addison, who heard a lady 
in a carriage utter a loud scream, and supposing her suffering 
under some violence or injury, inquired what was the matter, 
and was told nothing ; but the lady had been told she had a 
fine voice, and had been showing it by screaming. She only 
wished to make an exhibition. The bishop, too, was only 
screaming, and had formerly screamed the other way. The 
first part of his speech, as I read it in the newspaper, was a 



128 SELECT SPEECHES OP DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

good essay on disinterestedness ! "We were called, interested, 
seifisli; but would tlie Eiglit Eeverend Bisliop explain how 
it was that he had formerly been favorably disposed towards 
the Cathohcs, till he became tutor to the Earl of Liverpool's 
nephew, and that then all at once a change was effected in his 
mind. He is young — there are a great many other bishops, 
and he was certainly fortunate in his chance, for he adopted, 
if not a better, yet more enriching faith. It might be by a 
miracle — for a Protestant bishop might work miracles as well 
as Prince Hohenlohe — it might be by a mhacle, that the new 
light broke in on the bishop just at the right time ; that he 
was kept in darkness to a certain hour, and then was suddenly 
made to see the danger, and to turn from a friend to an ene- 
my. I have no objection to fau' enmity, but the Bishop of 
Chester's enmity was not fair. In his speech he had quoted a 
part of a speech of Doctor Dromgoole ; I beheve, too, from 
what I recollect, that the bishop quoted an exaggerated ver- 
sion, and he stated that this speech had been approved of by 
the Catholic Association, and by all the CathoHc priests, and 
at Kome. I heard this with great astonishment, for, in fact, 
Doctor Dromgoole's speech was the only one I ever recollect- 
ed which had been condemned at a pubhc meeting. 

It had been pronounced late in the evening. I was not 
present, or the sun would not have gone down on it unre- 
proved — and on the next day an extraordinary meeting of the 
CathoHc Board was summoned, and the speech condemned. 
He called the Protestant faith a novelty, and it was stated to 
him that whatever opinions he chose to discuss among theolo- 
gians, he must not insult the Protestants. Where the Bishop 
of Chester learned that this speech had been approved of at 
Eome, I do not know, but I suppose it might be by the same 
vivacity of fancy, and the same energy of imagination from 
which he learned that the speech had been approved of in Ire- 
land. I arraign him of inventing it. If the Catholic bishops 
who were examined before the lords, — if Doctor Murray, the 
sanctity of whose life was displayed in the suavity of his 
manners, and who was the mildest of all Christians — if Doc- 
tor Doyle, whose understanding was as vigorous as his man- 
ners were simple, who possessed an exhaustless store of know- 



ON THE DEFEAT OF THE EMANCIPATION BILL. 129 

ledge, and whose gigantic intellect could readily convey them 
to the mind of every other man — if these prelates in their ex- 
amination had invented anything like this against the Protes- 
tants, though he revered them as the representatives of those 
Christian bishops who had first estabhshed the Cathohc Faith 
in Ireland ; if the Lord Bishop of Chester could point out to 
him anything in their evidence similar to the invention he had 
alluded to, I wiU at once brand them as calumniators. I will 
not say anything of this kind to the Bishop of Chester, be- 
cause I do not belong to the same church with him ; but if he 
wiU point out to me anything so false in their evidence, I will 
teU the Irish bishops they are hars and calumniators, and 
that they have broken the commandment, for they had borne 
false witness against their neighbor. I would, however, say 
no more of the Bishop of Chester's speech, but if any more 
positive proof of its error were wanting, he had only to turn 
over the Dublin Evening Post for half an horn', and he would 
find the whole proceedings of the meeting at which Dr. 
Dromgoole's speech was censured. 

[]\Ir. O'Connell here took occasion to eulogize Mr. Canning, Mr. 
Plunkett and IVIr. Brownlow, and contrasted the conduct of the 
latter with that of the Marquis of Anglesea.] 

The contrast I was going to offer, and that which would 
alone make us despair, if I did not know my countrymen bet- 
ter, is that of the noble and gallant deserter, the Marquis of 
Anglesea. He said, now was the time to fight. But, most no- 
ble Marquis, we are not going to fight at all, and above all 
things, most noble Marquis, we are not going to fight now, un- 
der favor. This may be your time to fight — you may want us 
to fight ere long with you, as you wanted us before — jour 
glories, and your medals, and your dignities, and your titles, 
were bought by the young blood of Catholic Ireland. We 
fought, Marquis of Anglesea, and you know it well — we fought, 
and you are Marquis ; if we had not fought with you, your 
island of Anglesea would ere this have shrunk into a cabbage 
garden. And where would now have been the mighty con- 
queror of Europe : he, who had talent to command victory, and 
judgment to look for services, and not creeds to reward men 



130 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

for merits, and not for professions of faith ; where would he 
have been if Ireland had not stood by you ? I myself have 
worn, not only the trappings of woe, but the emblems of sin- 
cere mourning, for more than one gallant relative of mine 
who have shed their blood under your commands. We can 
fight — we will fight when England wants us. But we wiU not 
fight against her at present, and I trust we will not fight for her 
at all until she does us justice. 

But, most noble Marquis, though your soldiers fought gal- 
lantly and well with you, in a war which they were told was 
just and necessary, are you quite sure the soldiers will fight in 
a crusade against the unarmed and wretched peasantry of Ire- 
land ? Tour speech is published ; it will, when read in Ar- 
magh, and the neighboring counties, give joy, and will be cel- 
ebrated in the next Orange procession ; and again, as before, 
Cathohc blood will be shed ; but most noble Marquis, the 
earth has not covered all the blood that has been so shed ; it 
cries yet for vengeance to heaven, and not to man ; that blood 
may yet bring on an unfortunate hour of retribution ; and if'it 
do, what have you to fight with? Count you on a gallant 
army? There are English gentry amongst its officers, the 
sons and descendants of those who wielded the sword for Hb- 
erty, never to strike down to slavery their fellow men. Eng- 
Hsh chivalry will not join with you, most noble Marquis of 
Anglesea : and though you have deserted her and taken the 
prudent side of the Commander-in-Chief, yet, gallant Marquis, 
I think you have reckoned without your host. 

Let me tell you this story, sir. I am but an humble indi- 
vidual. It happened to me, not many months ago, to be going 
through England ; my family were in a carriage, on the box of 
which I was placed ; there came up on the road, eight or ten 
sergeants and corporals, with two hundred and fifty recruits. 
I perceived at once the countenances of my unfortunate coun- 
trymen laughing as they went along, for no other reason than 
because they were alive. They saw me, and some of them 
recognized me ; they instantly bui'st from their sergeants and 
corporals, formed around my carriage, and gave me three 
cheers, most noble Marquis. Well, may God bless them, 
wherever they are, poor fellows! Oh, you reckon without 



ON THE DEFEAT OF THE EMANCIPATION BILL. 131 

yoi?.' host, let me tell you, when you think that a British army 
will trample on a set of petitioners for their rights — beggars 
for a little charity, who are looking up to you with eyes lifted, 
and hands bent down. You will not fight us now, most noble 
Marquis ; and let me tell you, if the battle comes, you shall 
not have the choice of your position either. 

But though he is an excellent soldier, the Marquis is a spe- 
cial bad logician — no blame to him ; for, in the same speech, 
he said he was still for Cathohc emancipation, and would re- 
turn to us as soon as he was certain that emancipation was 
consistent with Protestant ascendency. Ascendency forsooth ! 
Catholic emancipation supposes universal equalization of civil 
ehgibihty, and it cannot consist with the ascendency of any 
party/ The Marquis is ready to open the window to us as 
soon as ho is sure the sun will not shine through it. I am not 
afraid of his sword. Still less do I feel in peril from his logic. 
The King of Prussia, when the Saxons left him, one fine morn- 
ing, said, " Let them go against us, it is better that all the en- 
emy should be together, and aU our friends together also." 
I make a present of you, to our opponents, most noble Mar- 
quis. Him who thus deserted us, and hallooed in the ranks of 
those whose cry was rehgious dissensions, — him have I con- 
trasted with the true genuine Protestant Christian, who, firm 
in his own opinion, was the enemy of the Catholics, so long as 
he behoved them to be the enemies of liberty, rehgious and 
civil ; but who, tho moment he was convinced that they were 
equally its friends aa himself, became our supporter, and set the 
glorious golden example of a perfect sacrifice of all that httle 
pride and jealousy which attach to a change of genuine opin- 
ion — ^him have I contrasted with Mr. Brownlow, who, be it 
ever remembered, stood by no Commander-in-Chief, and who 
can only expose himself in injury and expense, by a sacrifice 
to principles which the Marquis of Angelsea may admire, but 
cannot afford possibly to imitate. 

[Mr. O'Connell then proceeded to panegyrize the pubKc exer- 
tions of Sir Francis Burdett, Lord Nugent, and the Earl of Don- 
oughmore ; and passed some severe sarcasms on Sir T. Lethbridge 
and Mr. Banks, senior,] 



132 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

There was one speecii more on wliich I will say a few 
words — it was the speech of Lord Liverpool. I have never 
read a polemical speech of the noble lord till that. The noble 
lord seemed to have been employed in a manner quite becom- 
ing a great statesman; disregarding the course which our 
ancient enemy, France, was pursuing : not thinking that she 
was daily increasing her armies — that she was creating an effi- 
cient navy — that she was rapidly paying off her debt — that 
titheless France was daily improving her resources, and get- 
ting rid of the burdens which the war had left on her — that 
she was building a large class of frigates, and appeared as if 
inclined, on some fit opportunity, to dispute with us once more 
the emphe of the seas. Of all these facts the noble lord 
seemed heedless ; they were perhaps beneath the notice of his 
gTeat mind. He did not calculate on the rising generation of 
America, that country in which alone the L:ish Cathohc has 
fah play. He did not appear to consider in what time a west- 
erly wind, which would shut us up in the channel, would waft 
a fleet to the shores of Ireland, perhaps at some period of dis- 
tress and discontent, when arms and not men might be want- 
ing. All these were subjects below the consideration of Lord 
Liverpool's great mind. He was busied with one of much 
greater importance to the state. He was engaged in polemi- 
cal discussions about auricular confession and penance, and 
the mode of administering the sacrament ; and as the result of 
his studies in those important matters, he poured forth a rich 
and luscious discourse on an admiring audience. Li the 
course of that speech, the noble lord read the House of Com- 
mons no very gentle lecture for having presumed to send up 
such a bill. Here was another reformer. It had been said, 
perhaps untruly, that the great majority of the House were 
sent into their places by several members of the Peers : if that 
were true, it might perhaps account for the scolding given for 
having passed a bill not approved by then* masters. Be that 
however as it might, the House of Commons were scolded — 
perhaps they deserved it. The noble lord had expressed an 
opinion, that the religion of several millions of his fellow-sub- 
jects was such, as to render them unfit for the enjoyment of 
civil rights to the same extent as the Protestant. What new 



ON THE DEFEAT OF THE EMANCIPATION BILL. 133 

Kght was it tliat broke upon tlie noble Earl's mind, so as to 
produce this impression, so opposite to that which he seemed 
to feel only one year before ? 

The noble Earl appeared to hold a very different opinion of 
the Irish people last year. On the 8th of April, 1824, he was 
reported to have said in his place in the House, speaking of 
the Irish, " that whatever they may be in their own country, 
I say of them in this, that there does not exist, on the face of 
the globe, a more industrious, a more honest, or more kindly- 
disposed people." Surely they have not changed their reli- 
gion since then ; and if, in 1824, that rehgion could make them 
"honest, industrious, and kindly-disposed," why should it be 
urged as a ground for exclusion from the full enjoyment of the 
rights of British subjects in 1825 ? "What other use would a 
statesman make of rehgion but to instill morality and public 
order ? The noble Earl went on in the same speech to say, " I 
think it material to bear this testimony in their favor, because 
whatever may be the evils of Ireland, and from whatever 
source they may proceed, it is impossible for any man to ima- 
gine that they arise from any defect in the people. We may 
boldly assert that it is impossible to find a more valuable class 
of people in any country in the world." And yet it was this 
most valuable class of persons that the noble Earl in his late 
address would condemn to eternal exclusion from the full 
benefits of the constitution. Did the noble Earl imagine that 
the drivelling nonsense of Dr. Duigenan, which he had kept 
bottled up for seven or eight years, and now drew forth to 
treat the British nation, would drive a people such as he had 
described from their purpose? Let the honest lord stand 
forth and defend his consistency. He had made that speech 
from which he had just given the extract in 1824 ; the second 
speech was made in 1825. In the interim the Duke of York 
had made his declaration of eternal hostility to the great ques- 
tion of emancipation. The Bishop of Chester was not the 
only convert which that speech had made. The noble Earl, to 
use a vulgar adage, "knew how the cat jumped." Oh, my 
Lord Duke, with what pleasure will this speech of my Lord 
Liverpool and that of his Boyal Highness of York be received 
at the meeting of the aUied Sovereigns — those mighty despots 



134: SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

who, tyrannical as tliey are, still respect the consciences of 
their subjects ? "What joy will they not feel at reading this 
wise effusion of England's prime minister ? They will in their 
hearts say, " Let it go forth, it will work for our yiews." They 
will add : " Eockites, keep your spirits — 

Durate et vosmet rebus servate secundis. 

Or, as CromweU said, " * Trust in the Lord and rest on your 
pikes.' Matters are going on in the way that you and we and 
the enemies of England's peace could wish." Such would be 
the sentiments of all who were envious of England's power, 
and jealous of that freedom by which she acquired it. Their 
feelings on this subject would not be less gratified when they 
read, if they could beheve it, the calculation made by Mr. 
Leshe Foster, showing that the population of Ireland was less 
by two millions than it was generally considered. That hon- 
orable gentleman, who was the more fit to be the head peda- 
gogue of a large school, than at the head of a respectable 
county (a situation by the way in which the votes of Cathohcs 
had helped to placed him), had come to parHament with his 
primer and his multiphcation table, and endeavored to show 
that the Cathohcs of Ireland were not so numerous by two 
milHons as was generally beheved. He began by counting the 
number of children that attended some of the charity schools, 
and then taking the number of parents that each child had, 
which was easy to ascertain ; but he omitted to consider how 
many cliildren each set of parents had, which in Ireland might 
perhaps be more difficult. He also omitted to notice the num- 
ber of children that never attended at those schools ; but the 
result of his calculation was, that the Catholics were less by 
two millions than their advocates stated them to be. 

I have heard of killing oft' by computation by Captain Bo- 
badil ; but this beat BobadO. quite out. However, the error 
was not too gross for the party to which it was addressed, for 
the noble Earl swallowed it, Bobadil and all. What, I beg 
calmly to ask, would be the effect of the noble, lord's denun- 
ciation of perpetual exclusion, upon the four of five millions 
of Catholics which Mr. Leslie Foster had left ? (for he would 
admit for the moment that they were reduced two milhons 



ON TEE DEFEAT OF THE EMANCIPATION BILL. 135 

witliout the aid of Lord Anglesea's broadsword.) They were 
told they could not be free while the Protestant church estab- 
lishment existed, for that their entire emancipation was incom- 
patible with the safety of that establishment, was this not in 
effect putting every man, woman and child of the five millions 
of Catholics in hostility to that church? I beg most dis- 
tinctly to deny the justice of the assumption on which this 
argument of exclusion was founded. The Cathohcs did not 
wish to see the Protestant church subverted. I would solemn- 
ly declare, that I would rather perish than see the Protestant 
church subverted and my own church substituted in its place. 

[The learned gentleman, after adverting to the petitions from 
England in favor of a repeal of the assessed taxes, which amount- 
ed to about three millions, proceeded to observe, that that sum and 
much more might be saved to this country, by merely doing an act 
of justice to the Irish people.] 

Ireland now costs this country four millions a year more 
than her revenue produced. Let justice be done — let peace 
and content be brought about by this act of just concession, 
and L:eland, instead of being a burden to England, will prove 
a rich source of wealth and strength to the empire. Capital 
will flow into the country, her resources for its employment 
would become known, the facilities for every kind of com- 
merce which her ports afforded would ensure a flow of wealth 
to EngHsh capitahsts — the only persons who can take advan- 
tage of them — an advantage which they were deterred from 
seeking by the present unsettled state of the country. See 
what sources of annoyance, of war and bloodshed Wales 
and Scotland were, until they were incorporated in one gov- 
ernment with England, and until their inhabitants were fully 
admitted to all the advantages of the constitution as Brit- 
ish subjects, while they now contribute much to the strength 
of the empire. Why should not the same attempt be made 
with respect to Lreland ? Is she to be forever excluded from 
the full benefits of the constitution? Before I conclude, I 
beg to notice a paper which had within these four days been 
circulated with great assiduity by the enemies of emancipa- 
tion. One of those papers I now hold in my hand. It called 



13G SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

on all friends of the Protestant religion to read some extracts 
whicli it contained from the Journal des Debats, and to pause 
before tliey gave any support to the prayer of the Cathohcs. 
I will briefly state the nature of the case mentioned in the ex- 
tracts, in order to show the gross injustice of founding upon 
it any charge against the Catholics. In the department of 
Aisne, an appHcation was made by some Protestants for the 
erection of a Protestant church and the appointment of a 
minister of their religion to officiate in it. Now by the law of 
France the government is obliged in any place where there are 
five hundred Protestants residing, to erect a church for them, 
and to provide a minister to officiate in it. That clergyman 
was paid one hundred pounds a year, while a CathoUc curate 
officiating for a similar number of Cathohcs, received only 
eighty pounds a year. The reason was, that a Protestant 
clergyman might have a wife to maintain, while a Cathohc 
had not. The apphcation was refused, not because it was 
intended to discourage the Protestant religion, but because the 
number of Protestants making application did not amount to 
one half the number for which the law authorized the build- 
ing of a church — and this was the gross instance of rehgioua 
oppression of which such loud complaints were heard in this 
country! What would have been said if there were three 
hundred Protestants living in one parish and only one Catho- 
lic, and that those three hundred were not only obhged to 
provide a place of worship for themselves, but also to build, 
at their entire expense, a church for the use of one Cathohc ? 
Would not all England ring with outcries against the injustice 
of the act? And yet an act of this description, with the ex- 
ception that the parties were placed in situations the reverse 
of what he had described, had just occurred in L-eland. 

A petition was a short time ago presented to the House of 
Commons, from three hundred Cathohc inhabitants of a parish 
in Ireland, the name of which would sound very harsh in Eng- 
lish ears, and which could with difficulty be pronounced by 
English hps, the parish of Aghado. The petitioners stated 
that they were the only inhabitants of the parish except one, 
and that one was a Protestant ; that there was no Protestant 
church in the parish, but that the Protestant inhabitant had 



ON THE DEFEAT OF THE EMANCIPATION BILL. 137 

the use of a pew in a neigliboring parish diurch, and they 
complained of being called upon to bear the expense of build- 
ing a church for that one Protestant. What, he repeated, 
would have been said if the petitioners happened to be Pro- 
testants, and the one inhabitant a Catholic ? But because 
they were Cathohcs, it was passed over as a matter of course, 
and not a word was heard about the oppression of the case. 

Another subject on which a great outcry had been raised, 
was lately stated in a French journal, the Constitutionnel. It 
appeared that a church at Nerac had been in possession of a 
Protestant congregation since 1804. This church had origi- 
nally belonged to the Convent of St. Clare. In the French 
revolution, when the axe and the guUlotine were in daily use 
against the ministers and professors of religion, the nuns were 
turned out upon the world, and the convent church was used 
as a storehouse. In this situation it continued until 1804, 
when it was given to a Protestant congregation, with no other 
title of gift or purchase than the mere proces verhal which as- 
sented to the application which had been made for it. Not 
long back the Convent of St. Clare was restored, and not un- 
naturally, the nuns apphed for the church which had originally 
belonged to them. A regular legal proceeding was com- 
menced for its recovery, and the members of the Protestant 
congregation, not being able to prove a good title, were 
obliged to give it up. For this, however, the Times and 
Chronicle, and other Hberal journals, were quite enraged ; 
their very types seemed to fly about in a passion. But what 
was there in the case to call for such angry comment ? 

It was said that the cure of Nerac made use of some very 
illiberal expressions on the occasion of regaining possession ; 
if he did, there was no man connected with the Times or 
Chronicle who would more readily condemn any such expres- 
sion than he would. Let it, however, be recollected, that the 
charge made was the charge of an enemy. It was made by a 
party of the old Jacobin school — of those whose friends had 
succeeded ia overthrowing the altar of France foi a time, and 
now, when rehgion was restored, would wish to hold up its 
ministers to contempt or reproach, I think the charge, coming 
from such a quarter, ought not to be entitled to any more 



138 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'COKNELL. 

weight than an idle calumny which might be found against 
himself in the John Bull of this to;wn. 

Suppose during the power of Cromwell — that scriptural 
Christian, with texts in his mouth and sword in his hand— ^ 
suppose that rough commander were to have bestowed a Pro- 
testant church on a Catholic congTegation or an any of the 
various sects of Christians (I speak without disrespect of any) 
which swarmed through the land in his day, and suppose, on 
the restoration, it was to be claimed, and a legal process insti- 
tuted for its recovery, would the decision of that claim in favor 
of the original owners, be a proof of bigotry or oppression in the 
Church of England ? "Why then should that be called bigotry 
in one case, which would be an act of justice in the other ? 
Talk of bigotry in France from Cathohcs to Protestants ! In 
that country both were alike ehgible to places of trust and 
power in the state ; but whoever heard in any of their pubhc 
assembhes — in the Chamber of Deputies — of a Lethbridge 
or an Inglis getting up in his place and revihng with ccarse 
epithets the religion of his Protestant fellow-subjects ? (By 
the way, I intended to make a few remarks on the Index Ex- 
purgatorius of Sir H. Inglis, but I forgive him.) To those 
who talked of CathoHc bigotry I would say, let the Cathohcs 
of this country be placed on the same terms of equality with 
their Protestant brethren, as the Protestants of France are, 
with respect to their CathoHc fellow-subjects, and I would 
rest perfectly satisfied. 

I fear I have trespassed too long on the patience of the 
meeting — but there were one or two points more on which I 
would say a word. The bill which the Lords had rejected was 
accompanied part of the way in the other House, with two 
measures called its wings. Those measures were condemned 
by some who were friendly to the great question ; but the 
Cathohcs of Ireland were not the authors of those measures ; 
they were no party to their origin. Of that bill which went 
to make a provision for the Cathohc clergy I would say, that 
the clergy desired no such provision. They are content to 
serve their flocks for the humble pittance which they now 
receive. The rewards to which they looked for their incessant 
and valuable labors, are — let every hair of the Bishop of 



ON THE DEFEAT OP THE EMANCIPATION BILL. 139 

Chester's wig stand on end at hearing it — not of this but of ano- 
ther world. It is not the CathoUcs who desire those measures. 
They are sought for by the Protestants, who look upon them 
as some sort of security ; and the Catholics are disposed to 
make some sacrifice to honest prejudices, by acceding to that 
which they did not approve. It was this f eehng which pro- 
duced those measures, and brought on that ridiculous scene 
of one of his Majesty's ministers strongly objecting to the 
" wings," while another was eagerly flapping them on, until, 
like the tomb of Mahomet, the Catholic bill hung suspended 
between the two counteracting influences. As to the second 
bill, respecting the forty shilling freeholders, it is one which I 
cannot approve. I am too much of a reformer, and of that 
class called " radical," to wish for any such alteration. I did 
assent to it only because it was considered that Protestants 
desired it. I would much rather have emancipation without 
it. They are now, however, gone by, and I hope they will 
never again make their appearance — certain it is, I shall never 
wish for tliem, unless they are earnestly desired by the Pro- 
testants. 

I now, my lord Duke, take my leave ; I fear I have ex- 
hausted the patience of this meeting. I am grateful for the 
attention with which I have been heard ; I have spoken under 
feeUngs, perhaps, of some irritation — certainly under those of 
deep disappointment. A crowd of thoughts have rushed upon 
me, and I have given utterance to them as they arose, without 
allowing my judgment a pause as to which I should select and 
which restrain. I now go back tojmjow coimtry, where I 
expect to find a feverish restTesshess at having insult added to 
our injuries. Our enemies — perhaps I ought to say oppo- 
nents — have offered this insult ;( they have barbed with dis- 
grace, the dart of death. ; It will be impossible not to expect 
a degree of soreness at the way in which our claims have been 
met — at this additional insult. It is impossible not to feel 
disappointed at the manner in which we have seen Lord Liver- 
pool truckle to the nonsense about the coronation oath (some 
person here said No, no.) I repeat it, he did ; and my con- 
viction is that aU we heard reported of him in the newspapers 
was dictated from that quarter. We shall now return to Ire- 



140 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

land, and tliere advise our countrymen to be patient — to bear 
the further delay of justice with calmness, but not to relax 
their fau', open, and legitimate efforts in again seeking for 
thek rights. They have put down one association ; I promise 
to treat them to another. They shall trench further on your 
Hberties — they shall dive deeper into the vitals of the consti- 
tution before they drive us from our purpose. We shall go on, 
but it will be without anger or turbulence. In that steady 
course we will continue to use all legitimate means to accom- 
plish our object, until Enghsh good sense shall overcome 
bigotry in high stations — shall put down intolerance in per- 
sons great in office — until the minister be driven back to the 
half honesty which he before possessed, or to that retirement 
which he rigidly deserves." 



SPEECH ON THE TEEATY OF LIMEEICK, 1826. 



[On submitting to the Catholic Association, in 1826, the draft of 
a petition to parliament, asking that the provisions of the treaty 
of Limerick be carried into effect, Mr. O'Connell spoke as fol- 
lows :] 

The question is narrowed to a single point, and to any one 
reviewing the facts which history presented, it was impossible 
to deny that the treaty has been foully and flagitiously vio- 
lated. The penal code was a violation of it, and while a par- 
ticle of that code remains, so long the solemn compact entered 
into between the English government and the Iiish people is 
a disgraceful monument of British perfidy. That treaty was 
a solemn, dehberate and authorized agreement. It w^as signed 
by bishops and commanders, and it was signed by Ginkle, 
who had the command of his government to give even better 
terms than it insured, and to make peace on any conditions, 
no matter how favorable to the people of Limerick, and of 
course to the whole people of Ireland. "Who is it, who looks 
at history, that can be surprised that the wish to effect a 
peace should exist on the part of the Enghsh ? At the time of 



SPEECH ON THE TEEATY OE LIMERICK. 141 

the war England was split into parties and dissensions. Wil- 
liam bad tlie adherence of the Whigs to his cause, but the 
Tories, who were the more numerous, though not so powerful, 
were arrayed against him. The Tories were like the cowardly 
Orange faction of the present day ; they were mean and das- 
tardly, and took especial care to keep themselves from every 
enterprise in which their persons would be endangered. The 
Scotch highlanders, a brave, hardy, and chivalrous race, who 
were Cathohcs, were devoted to the house of Stuart, and so 
were those of the lowlands too. The Calvinists of that coun- 
try were in the same situation with the Irish of the present 
day ; their consciences were oppressed — their religious liberty 
was restricted. They fought however in the field for their 
rehgion. Their efforts, although courageous and adventurous, 
were not suited to the meek spirit of Christianity. I would 
not fight for religion, because rehgion does not inculcate nor 
sanction such an act ; but for my civil rights, I trust in God, 
there is no man who has a more sincere regard for their value, 
or who would make greater sacrifices and efforts for their 
defence. In England there were many enemies against Wil- 
liam, and his situation was precarious. In Ireland his pros- 
pects were bad and discouraging : the Irish forces, though in 
part unsuccessful, were not discomfited, and they were learn- 
ing those rules of discipline, without which an army is no 
more than a mob. The battle of the Boyne was lost not by 
the inferiority of the Irish forces, but by the paltry, pitiful 
cowardice of James. He only appeared once in the battle on 
that day. He made only one appeal, and that was when the 
soldiery of England was cutting down by the troops of Ire- 
land under Hamilton — then he exclaimed, " O spare my Eng- 
lish subjects !" Like another Duke of York he took up his 
position in the rear, and the races of the Helder had a glori- 
ous prototype in the races of the Boyne. " Change generals," 
exclaimed the gallant Began, in the evening when the battle 
was done, " Change generals, and we will fight the battle over 
again!" Three thousand were wounded in that battle and 
but three hundred were taken prisoners ! How illustrative of 
the humanity of the conquerors ! Still Clare was open, and 
its batteries were in possession of the Irish. The fortifications 



142 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

of Limerick were yet at their command — Frencli succors were 
daily expected — the war between England and France was 
already declared — and with such opposition, were it not for 
the treaty of Limerick, "Wilham would have been driven back 
into Holland, if even there he would have found a refuge 
from the French. The winter was fast approaching. His 
armies consisted of some Dutch and some Brandenburg troops, 
and some that were called Irish on whom no reliance was 
placed : they were the Enniskillen and Londonderry regiments. 
Oh ! what regiments these were ! Schomberg, in speaking of 
them, was only puzzled to decide which of the two regiments 
was more thievish, because both the regiments were much 
less remarkable for their valor than for their propensity to rob 
and steal. Their officers were peasants — plebeians who had 
advanced themselves by their baseness, and like the Orange- 
men of the present time, they were formidable only to an un- 
armed people. It was not unlikely that Mr. Dawson was the 
descendant of one of these peasants. The pleasure he felt in 
reverting to those times might probably be thus accounted for. 
This Mr. Dawson, who, if he were not a clerk in office, would 
not be worthy of contradiction, asserts many extraordinary 
things respecting this country. He felt no interest in preserv- 
ing its character, because, Uke his brother Orangemen, he was 
not indigenous to the soil. They must certainly be exotics, 
for if half their venom was natural, the influence of St. Pat- 
rick would be effectual in banishing the reptiles from among 
us. But the reptile still lives, and here are its hisses. 

[Mr. O'Connell here took up a printed report of Mr. Dawson's 
speech.] 

Mr. Dawson tells us that the history of Ireland is a mere 
waste — not a spot in it to vary the dismal scene but London- 
derry, that furnished the robbers to Marshal Schomberg. 
"Let us trace," says he, "its dark and bloody progress. 
When a foreign foe invaded, it shrunk at the foot of an insig- 
nificant conqueror." And this is what Mr. Dawson said of a 
country to Avhich he boasts of belonging. Let me tell him 
this country was never beat. It was by Irishmen she was 
always ruined. Their treachery and disunion were the cause 



SPEECH ON THE TEEATY OP LIMERICK. 143 

of her defeat. Four fifths of the Irish troops joined the 
CromweUian invaders under Dermot, and it was to their deser- 
tion, and not to the superior arms of her enemies, that her 
conquest was attributable. Mr. Dawson proceeded — "con- 
tinued insurrection, intestine wars, bloody massacres, treache- 
rous treaties." Treacherous treaties! Come forward, Mr. 
Dawson, with your native host of Orangemen, and prove 
infraction of one single treaty on the part of the Irish. I ask 
but one. But he takes care to make the charge general. Oh ! 
that is the way in which libels and mahgnant imputations are 
uttered and circulated ; for he knows he cannot substantiate 
it. "Yersatur in generalibus." Oh! how fatally true the 
Irish were to their treaties may be read in that of Limerick. 
The treaty was signed before communication was had to the 
other part of the army, which were, Mr. Chairman, under the 
command of an ancestor of your own. Before it was com- 
pleted, the French fleet with men and arms arrived at Dingle. 
Some argued that the treaty was not binding — that it had 
been agreed upon only in the South. What was the reply ? 
" We know we are not bound by the treaty, but Irish honor is 
pledged, and never shall we stain it." And well did they observe 
it. They dismissed the French troops — they admitted their 
enemies. They relied on Enghsh faith and Orange honor, and 
the consequence, the natural consequence, was that they were 
duped. But I turn on Mr. Dawson and say to him — you accuse 
us of violating treaties ; if you cannot show me one you are a 
slanderer. And I turn on him again and say — show me one 
sohtary treaty that England has ever performed toward us, and 
I will forgive her aU the rest. No, sir, from the time the first 
footstep of the Saxon polluted our land, down to the last, and 
not least flagrant breach of faith at the execrable Union, I defy 
him to show me one compact between England and this coun- 
try, that has not been treacherously and basely broken. The 
description of a treaty with the Irish, given by Clarendon, shows 
that the intention, at the moment of entering into them, was to 
delude and betray us. Next, Mr. Dawson says : " A system- 
atic combination against the introduction of the arts and bless- 
ings of peace are (with those qualities he before stated) to be 
found in mournful succession throughout the lapse of centu- 



144 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

ries." Eeally, this is very, very heartrending. They first 
take away our possessions, our rights, our wealth, and every 
incentive to labor and industry, and then one of that very 
faithless and base crew who betrayed us, an underling of a 
minister, is sent to thwart and irritate us — to charge us with 
the effects of their own perfidy, and to remind us of the bless- 
ings we have lost by being the victims of their diabolical 
deceit. 

" During five or six centuries," says Mr. Dawson, " the his- 
tory of Ireland presents not one single fact to claim the admi- 
ration or even the respect of posterity." The blundeiing bigot 
then, with a classic affectation, asks : " Where can we look for 
one green spot to cheer us in our gloomy pUgrimage ?" Oh, 
hear this Orange bigot asking for a green spot ! I was 
reading at the very time I received the newspaper with Mr. 
Dawson's speech, a passage in a work which has been ever 
and is still looked up to as a high authority on the subject of 
which it treats. It is an account of the injuries and massa- 
cres of the Irish in 1641, by Dr. Curry, and there the occur- 
rence to which I allude is to be found. Many, innumerable 
instances could be drawn from the historians of the times in 
which Mr. Dawson's ignorance dehghts to revel, not of one 
fact, but of hundreds of facts, calculated to elevate the charac- 
ter of the Catholics of Ireland. Speaking of the county of 
Mayo, the historian says : " In this county few murders were 
committed by either side, though the hbel saith, that about 
two hundred and fifty Protestants were murdered, whereof at 
Belluke two hundred and twenty ; whereas not one person was 
miu'dered there, which the now Lady of Montrath can witness ; 
her ladyship and Sir Kobert Hanna, her father, with many 
others, being retreated thither for security, were all convej'ed 
safe to Manor Hamilton. And it is observable that the said 
lady and the rest came to Mr. Owen O'Rorcke's, who kept a 
garrison at Drumaheir, for the Irish, before they came to 
Manor Hamilton, whose brother was prisoner with Sir Frede- 
rick Hamilton. And the said Mr. O'Eorcke, having so many 
persons of quality in his hands, sent to Sir Frederick to enlarge 
his brother, and that he would convey them all safe to him. 
But Sir Frederick, instead of enlarging his brother, hanged 



SPEECH ON THE TEEATY OF LIMERICK. 145 

him the next day, which might have well provoked the gentle- 
man to revenge, if he had not more humanity than could be 
well expected upon such occasions, and in times of so great 
confusion ; yet he sent them aU safe when they desired." Yes, 
he sent them all safe when they desired. He did what he 
ought to do, harrowed as his heart must have been at the 
atrocious outrage that had been committed by his rash and 
ferocious enemy. He did what an Irish gentleman did do, 
and does do — he spurned at cruelty. He was not goaded, even 
by the example set him, into an imitation of barbarity. His 
honor stifled his sense of injury. I will give that fact to Mr. 
Dawson, and let him make the most of it, in classic Elimina- 
tions against the Cathohcs of Ireland. Let Mr. Dawson read 
this fact, and if he persist in aspersing his native land after 
the perusal of it — if he should then impugn the chivalrous gen- 
erosity — the humanity — ^the virtues of Ireland, I will only say, 
that if Ireland has produced generous hearts and dispositions, 
she has also produced monsters and anomaHes, which have 
turned what was intended to be one of the gardens of the 
world into the pitiful pelting province that she is at this 
moment ! 

Mr. Dawson had said that the object of James II. was to 
establish the Cathohc religion both in England and Ireland, 
and with it unUmited despotism. This was a false assertion ; 
he did no more than to proclaim toleration, and this was 
enough for the Dawsons of the day to expel him from the 
throne. The prosecution of the seven bishops I now condemn, 
and if I had Hved iu the day of the occurrence I would have 
condemned it then. Mr. Dawson says, that in order to effect 
the purpose of estabhshing an unhmited despotism jn Ireland, 
James proceeded to remodel the civil estabhshments, and he 
accordingly displaced every Protestant who held an office in 
the administration of justice, and filled up the place of chan- 
cellor, chief judges, puisne judges, privy counsellors, sheriffs, 
magistrates, and even constables, with Cathohcs. Talking of 
constables reminds me of the Dubhn corporation ; that im- 
maculate body once petitioned for the removal of (Mulvaney, 
the scavenger,jfrom his functions, because he was, contrary to 
law, a Papist I Oh, what a relentless spirit ! They would not 



146 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

allow a Papist to fill even the dirtiest office of the state. It 
is asserted by Mr. Dawson, that all the judges appointed by 
James were intolerant. This is false ; James nominated only 
three judges — Nugent, Lord Eiverston, Sir Stephen Eice, and 
Daly. Would to God all Judge Dalys were like him. He 
never raised himself to the bench by destroying the interests 
of his country. He never devoted his leisure hours to calum- 
niating his wretched, ragged countrymen ! All three individ- 
uals nominated by James to the bench, were remarkable 
for their purity and perfection. They are quoted by Protest- 
ant writers as the models of judicial knowledge and purity. 
It was related of Rice that he gambled his property, and this 
was the only blemish that ever sullied his reputation. They 
lived in troubled times and they survived them. They did not 
fly, as they would have done if they had been guilty of a crime 
or a derehction of duty. They lived honored and respected, 
and they descended to their graves without taint or reproach, 
having served their King well, and I trust having served their 
God better. Oh ! it is only Orange bigotry that could ransack 
the very graves to find materials of insult ; but in this instance, 
as in every other, it has failed, and I defy it to the proof. 
Mr. Dawson had alleged it as a charge, that it was enacted by 
James that three fellows of the University were prohibited 
from meeting together. Even if it were so, how did the enact- 
ment differ from the enactments usual in all cases of civil 
commotion. What was this act intended to prevent but a 
Protestant insurrection ? Flagrante bello, it is provided that 
there shall be no meetings of persons who might conspire to 
cause a pubhc tumult, and this which is now practiced — ^nav, 
which is carried to an unparalleled extent in Ireland under 
the present government, is charged as a crime upon James. 
But it should not be forgotten that by the repeal of that act 
of settlement, the monarch himself was a sufferer to an im- 
mense amount. The passing of that act, however, might not 
be justified, but decidedly any act that would tend to subvert 
it would be unjust. Transfers and conveyances had been 
made to such an extent, that it would be an unjustifiable crime 
to disturb them. I have been accused of recommending the 
repeal of the act of settlement, and I dare say I -vnll now be 



SPEECH ON THE TREATY OF LIMERICK. 147 

accused of recommending it. But as a proof of my sincerity 
in defending it, I "will say that if that act were annulled I 
would be comparatively a beggar. My property hangs upon 
its continuance. The property of my two brothers, who are 
both independent, hangs upon the same title. What then 
have I to gain by a change ? Mr. Dawson had complained 
of the attainder of two thousand six hundred Protestants by 
James. But what was there in that, worthy of reprobation ? 
Those attainted men had fled the country ; they were told that 
if they did not come back within a certain period they would be 
attainted. They did not return and they were attainted ! Why 
should they not? They were attainted because they were 
enemies of the King ; and if they were not enemies of the 
King, they were base cowards, for they ran away when their 
country needed their assistance in its cause. In Athens it was 
the law that every ma,n who was neutral was criminal — " He 
who is not for us is agaiust us." And shall it be said that those 
who fled from their country when she needed their energies on 
her behalf, were not deserving of obloquy and punishment ? 

Mr. Dawson had said that the parhament of James was 
Cathohc. I admit the fact. But let Mr. Dawson show me 
any act of their doing that can shake their purity and hon- 
esty ! Let him show me an act even proposed for the purpose 
of oppressing the consciences of Protestants ! No, the parha- 
ment of that day sat ia friendship with a few Protestants, and 
their BiU of Eights was more extensive even than that of Eng- 
land. Even after the excesses and cruelties that had been com- 
mitted against the Catholics, when they were deprived of 
power, and when they regained it, was there a system of blood 
and cruelty or their part, although they had the dominion if 
they used it ? Under Mary the Catholics of Ireland were not 
persecutors, and again under James they wielded theu^ power 
in mercy and toleration. They forgot the persecutions which 
their body endured under EHzabeth, and they only bore in 
recollection the character of their religion, which taught them 
to give charity and good-will for persecution and cruelty. Mr. 
Dawson had said that King James had taken away their 
churches from the Protestants. This assertion, as well as the 
other assertion, made by that profound statesman, was false. 



148 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

This statement was derived from the pure pages of Archbishop 
King's work. The cathedral of Christ's Church in Dublin was 
the King's chapel, and it was in that case alone that James 
exercised his authority, and in dispossessing the holders of 
that cathedral he acted under his royal right and was not in- 
fluenced by his rehgious feelings. The contrary was the fact 
with regard to Wexford. In that county the Cathohc soldiery 
had taken possession of a Protestant church, and when James 
heard the circumstances he ejected the soldiery and restored 
the church to its owners. Doctor Leslie, a learned divine of 
the Protestant Church, had challenged the accuracy of King's 
book, and had denounced and refuted it, and now, after such 
a lapse of years, Mr. Peel sends out his underling, Mr. Daw- 
son, his clerk, to repeat the calumnies. Who was this King ? 
He was a vile parasite of James ? He was the ecclesiastic 
who prayed from his pulpit, that God might blast him if he 
ever preached any other doctrine than passive obedience, and 
at another time, that God might blast and destroy William 
and his consort, if they had any intention of invading this 
country ! He — he is the vile toad-eater, who has denounced 
the monarch whose feet he kissed ! Dopping, who preached 
up that there was no faith to be kept with the Cathohcs of 
Limerick, was the first to present an address to King James 
on his landing. What an exquisite pair of defenders of the 
violation of the treaty of Limerick ! What immaculate au- 
thority for Mr. Dawson to quote from ! Is it to be endured 
that Peel, who knows nothing of the history of these times, or 
the history of our country, is to send out one of his clerks to 
blow up, with his pestiferous breath, the embers of those un- 
holy fires of bigotry which had been nearly extinguished by 
the superincumbent influence of hberahty and good fellow- 
ship, and to excite, by his evil agency, the inflammable ma- 
terials of Irish society ? Before I conclude, I will read an 
extract from a work written by Mr. Storey, a chaplain in the 
army of King WiUiam, who is a tolerably good authority on 
the bravery of the L"ish troops, which Mr. Dawson has re- 
pudiated : 

Wednesday, the 24th. A breach being made near St. John's Gate, 
over the Black Battery, that was about twelve yards long, and pretty fiat, 



SPEECH ON THE TREATY OF LIMERICK. 149 

as it appeared to its, the Kuig gave orders that the counterscarp should 
be attacked that afternoon, to which purpose a great many woolsacks 
were carried down, and good store of ammunition, with other things 
suitable for such work. AU the grenadiers in the army were ordered to 
march down into the trenches, which they did. Those, being about 
five hundred, were commanded, each company, by their respective cap- 
tains, and were to make the first attack, being supported by one bat- 
talion of the Blue Dutch on the right, then Lieutenant Douglass's regi- 
ment. Brigadier Stuart's, my Lord Meath's, and my Lord Lisburn's, as 
also a Brandenburg regiment. These were all posted towards the breach, 
upon the left of whom were Col. Cutts and the Danes. Lieutenant 
General Douglass commanded, and their orders were to possess them- 
selves of the counterscarp and maintain it. We had also a body of horse 
drawn up to succor the foot upon occasion. About half an hour, after 
three, the signal being given by firing three pieces of cannon, the grena- 
diers, being in the furthest angle of our trenches, leaped over and ran 
towards the counterscarp, firing their pieces and throwing their grenades. 
This gave the alarm to the Irish, who had their guns all ready, and 
discharged gi-eat and small shot upon us as fast as 'twas possible. Our 
men were not behind them in either, so that in less than two minutes, 
the noise was so terrible that one would have thought the very skies 
were ready to rend in sunder. This was seconded by dust, smoke, and 
all the terrors that the art of man could invent to ruin and undo one 
another ; and to make it the more uneasy, the day itself was exces- 
sively hot to the bystanders, and much more sore, in all respects, to 
those upon action. Captain Carlisle, of my Lord Drogheda's regiment, 
ran in with his grenadiers to the counterscarp, and though he received 
two wounds between that and the trenches, yet he went forward and 
commanded his men to throw in the grenades, but in the leaping into 
the dry ditch below the counterscarp, an Irishman below shot him dead. 
Lieutenant Burton, however, encouraged the men, and they got upon 
the counterscarp, and aU the rest of the grenadiers were as ready as 
they. By this time the Irishmen were throwing down theii' arms and 
running as fast as they could into town, which, our men perceiving, 
entered the breach, peU-mell, with them, and half the Earl of Drogheda's 
grenadiers and some others were actually in town. The regiments that 
were to second the grenadiers went to the counterscarp, and, having no 
order to proceed, they stopt." • [I engage they did, they stopt sure 
enough.] ' ' The Irishmen were all running from the walls, and quite over 
the bridge into the English town ; but seeing but a few of our men 
enter, they were with much ado persuaded to rally, and those that were 
in seeing themselves not followed, and their ammunition being spent, 
they designed to retreat, but some were shot, some taken, and the rest 
came out again, but very few without being wounded. The Irish then 
ventured upon the breach again, and from the walls and every palace so 
pestered us upon the counterscarp, that, after nigh three hours resist- 



150 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

ing bullets, stones, broken bottles, from tlie very women, who boldly 
etood in the breach and were nearer our men than their own, " 

And here I will pay a tribute to tlie heroic -virtues of these 
"women, who thus sacrificed themselves for their country's 
honor. An officer of the Irish army was wounded. The 
instance is one of singular interest, arising from female courage 
and presence of mind. He was wounded, and was flying into 
his own house, and was pursued by an enemy. He had gained 
his door, and his wife, from a window in the house, was a wit- 
ness of his efforts to escape from his relentless pursuer. The 
window-stone was loose, and it was a ready instrument for her 
purpose. Her husband was nearly a victim to the revenge of 
his foe, who had just stepped upon the threshold, when the im- 
pulse of the mind of the fond and courageous woman gave a 
strength and energy to her efforts, — she hurled the stone upon 
the ruffian's head, and he bit the dust. Oh, what splendid de- 
votion to country ! Would there have been an Irish heart 
among the Irish, if they did not beat out their invaders, stim- 
ulated as they were, by such heartcheering examples. 

[Mr. O'Connell resumed the reading.] 

" whatever ways could be thought on to destroy us, our ammunition 

being spent, it was judged safest to return to our trenches. When the 
work was at the hottest, the Brandenburg regiment, who behaved them- 
selves very well, had got upon the Black Battery, when the enemy's 
powder happened to take fire, and blew up a great many of them, the 
men, fagots, and stones, and what not, flying into the air with a most 
terrible noise. Colonel Cutts was commanded by the Duke of Wurtem- 
burg, to march towards the spur at the south gate, and beat in the Irish 
that appeared there, which he did, though he lost several of his men, 
and was himself wounded ; he went within half musket shot of the gate, 
and all his men were open to the enemy's fire, who lay secure within the 
walls. The Danes were not idle all the while, but fired upon the enemy 
with all imaginable fuiy, and had several killed, but the mischief was, 
we had but one breach, and all towards the left, it was impossible to get 
into the town when the gates were shut, if there had beeu no enemy to 
oppose us, without a great many scaling ladders, which we had not. 
From half an hour after three till after seven, there was one continued 
fire of grape and small shot without any intermission ; insomuch that 
the smoke that went from the town reached in one continued cloud to 
the top of a mountain at least six miles off. When our men drew ofi", 
some were brought up dead, and some without a leg, others wanted 



SPEECH ON THE TEEATY OF LIMEEICK. 151 

arms, and some were blind with powder, especially a great many of the 
poor Brandenburghers looked like furies, with the misfortune of gun- 
powder. One Mr. Upton, getting in amongst the Irish in town, and 
seeing no way to escape, went in the crowd undiscovered, till he came at 
the Governor, and then surrendered himself. There was a captain, one 
Bedloe, who deserted the enemy the day before, and now went upon the 
breach, and fought bravely on our side, for which his Majesty gave him 
a company. The King stood nigh Cromwell's fort all the time, and the 
business being over, he went to his camp very much concerned, as in- 
deed was the whole army ; for you might have seen a mixture of anger 
and sorrow in everybody's countenance. The Irish had two small field 
pieces planted in the King's Island, which flanked their own counter- 
scarp, and in our attack, did us no small damage, as did also two guns 
more that they had planted within the town, opposite the breach, and 
charged with cartridge shot. We lost at least five hundred upon the 
spot, and had a thousand more wounded, as I understood by the sur- 
geons of our hospitals, who are the properest judges. The Irish lost a 
great many by cannon and other ways ; but it cannot be supposed that 
their loss should be equal to ours, since it is a much easier thing to de- 
fend waUs, than 'tis by main strength to force people from them ; and 
one man within, has the advantage of four without. " 

[Here followed a list of officers killed and wounded, needless to 
be recounted.] 

Are we after this to be told by Dawson that our country- 
men were not brave, and would not succeed, if they had held 
out? In a base violation of the treaty, which had been 
signed before the waUs of Limerick, the privileges and immu- 
nities promised, were denied, — the treaty was broken — ^it 
stands a record of British perfidy ! Our ancestors, sir, for I, 
too, may say that blood runs even in my veins from those 
who fought before Limerick, are denied their rights ! Your 
noble brother, degraded from his natural rank, is unrepresent- 
ed and unrepresenting. He neither has a vote in the election 
of his own order, nor the voice of a Forty-shilling Free- 
holder in returning a member to the Commons' House of 
Parhament. "Where is the hberty the Cathohcs enjoyed un- 
der Charles I., which was secured to them by the treaty of 
Limerick ? Tell me that, Mr. Dawson. Tell me that, Orange 
faction. Let Mr. Peel bring his borough members, who 
come in when the division beU is rung, to assert facts contrary 
to reason and religion against us ; but let them not insult us 



152 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

bj saying that tlie treaty of Limerick has not been foully "vio- 
lated. 

There is another trait of Mr. Dawson's hypocrisy that is 
worth mentioning. After my examination before the ParHa- 
mentary Committee, Mr. Dawson came up to me, and told me, 
in the weakness of his heart, that my evidence had removed 
many prejudices from him, and that his opinions on many 
subjects were altered. I rejoiced at the declaration, and I 
respected him for making it at the time. I mentioned in pub- 
he the fact, and stated that Mr. Dawson had shaken hands 
with me in the interview, and this part of the relation it was 
deemed necessary to contradict in the Dubhn Evening Mail. 
I do not know whether he shook hands with me or not. I 
hope now he did not. I would shrink from any contact with 
a man who could make such a declaration to me as he did, 
and since falsify it by his acts. 

I have done — I have shown that thQ treaty of Limerick 
was fouUy violated. I arraign those who perpetuate the vio- 
lation by their hostility to us, and to our cause. I arraign 
their bigotry in the face of the world ; and I demand in the 
name of humanity and justice and faith, that at least the 
terms of the compact should be fulfilled. 



SPEECH AT THE BAR OE THE HOUSE OF COM- 
MONS, TO MAINTAIN HIS EIGHT TO SIT AS 
MEMBER FOR CLARE. 



I CAKNOT, su", help feeling some apprehension when I state 
that I am very ignorant of the forms of this House, and there- 
fore that I shall require much indulgence from you, if, in what 
I am about to say, I should happen, by anything that may fall 
from me, to yiolate them. I claim my right to sit and vote in 
the House, as the representative for the county of Clare, 
without taking the Oath of Supremacy. I am ready to take 
the Oath of Allegiance, provided by the recent statute, which 







■CONNELL EEFUSING TO TAKE THE OATH. 



CLAIMING A SEAT IN PAELIAMENT. 153 

was passed for the relief of his Majesty's Eoman CathoHc sub- 
jects. My desire is to have that oath administered to me, 
and of course I must be prepared to show that I am quahfied 
in point of property ; and whether the House thinks I can 
take the new oath or not, if I am required to take both, I am 
wiUing, at my own hazard, to sit and vote in the House. My 
right is in its own nature complete. I have been returned as 
duly elected by the proper officers. It appears by that return, 
that I have a great majority of the county of Clare, who voted 
for my return. That return has since been discussed in a 
committee of this House, and has been confirmed by the 
unanimous decision of that committee. I have as much right 
to sit and vote in this House, according to the principles of 
the constitution, as any of the honorable or right honorable 
gentlemen by whom I am surrounded. I am a representative 
of the people, and on their election I claim the right of exer- 
cising power with which their election has invested me. That 
question cannot arise at common law ; it must depend only on 
the statute, whether a representative of the people is bound, 
before he discharges liis duty to his constituents, to take an 
oath of any description. Up to the reign of Elizabeth, I be- 
lieve I am correct in saying that no such oath existed. Up to 
the close of the reign of Charles II., no oath was taken within 
the House ; the 30th Charles II. was the first statute requir- 
ing any oath to be taken within the House itself. The Oath 
of Allegiance (and no man is more ready to take the Oath of 
Allegiance than I am), the Oath of Supremacy (and there 
were very few in Parliament at that time who would not take 
it), and the Declaration, were for the first time introduced by 
that statute ; and it not only required them to be taken and 
subscribed, but it went on to provide remedres against individ- 
uals who should neglect or refuse to take and subscribe- them. 
Among those remedies, some of which were of an exceedingly 
extensive, and I may almost call them of an unlawful nature, 
was a pecuniary penalty of five hundred pounds ; which I 
mention because I shall again caU the attention of the House 
to it, before I close what I have to offer to its consideration. 
The purpose of that statute was obvious ; it was stated to be 
" for the mode of serving the King's person and government," 



154 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

and the mode of attaining tliat object was disabling Papists 
from sitting in either House of Parliament. I am, in the dis- 
courteous language of the act, a Papist — I come within 
their description. I cannot take the oath prescribed, and 
shall shrink from signing the Declaration. The object of the 
statute is sufficiently clear from its title, and the construction 
of the statute must follow from that title. Therefore it is per- 
fectly evident that as long as this act remained in force, it 
would have been vain for the people to elect me for any 
county or borough, as I could not exercise the right vested in 
me. The law declares expressly, that a refusal to take the 
oath shall be followed by the vacating of the seat, and the 
issue of a new writ. 

Up to the period of the Legislative Union with Ireland, this 
statute, by means of other acts, was enforced, that is, it was 
partially enforced ; the Declaration was enforced, and I find, 
by reference to the statute, which I took out of the library of 
this House, that, as to the oaths, they were repealed by 1st 
Wilham and Mary, section 1, chapter 1. That act altered the 
form of the Oath of Supremacy ; therefore, it was an oath 
asserting affirmatively that the supremacy in spiritual matters 
was in the crown, but that act negatives the foreign suprema- 
cy or spiritual jurisdiction. So stood the statute law until the 
period of the Legislative Union with L'eland. At that pe- 
riod, in my humble opinion, an alteration took place in the 
effect of the statute law. I respectfully submit, that at that 
period this alteration took place in the law — that whereas, by 
this statute of Charles II., and by that of 1st "William and 
Mary, pains, penalties and disabilities were enacted against 
any man for sitting and voting without having taken the 
oaths, the direction of the act of Union was, that every man 
should take the oaths, but it imposed no pains, penalties or 
disabihties. I submit that the statute of Charles the Second 
could not operate upon this parhament ; that it was an act of 
the English parhament; even a statute passed after the 
union with Scotland, could not operate ; nothing can operate 
in this parliament but a Union statute, or a statute subse- 
quent to the Union. This seems to me a perfectly plain propo- 
sition, such as no lawyer can controvert, and such as no judge 



CLAIMING A SEAT IN PAELIAMENT. 155 

could possibly overrule. First, then, I claim to sit and vote 
without taking the oaths, by virtue of the Union Act. Sec- 
ondly, I claim under the Eehef BUI to sit and vote without 
subscribing the Declaration. Thirdly, I claim under the Re- 
lief Bill to sit and vote without taking the Oath of Supre- 
macy : and, fourthly, I claim, under the positive enactments 
of the Relief Bill, to sit and vote without taking any other 
oath than that mentioned in the Relief Bill itself. I will en- 
deavor to go through these four topics as briefly as pos- 
sible. 

The Union Act, as I before remarked, certainly directed 
the oaths to be taken, but with equal certainty it did not an- 
nex pains or penalties in not taking them. It did, however, 
direct them to be taken, and it is for the House to determine 
whether it has authority to prevent any man from exercising 
the right of representation without taking those oaths. I do 
not mean to canvass that point at great length : I do not 
mean to concede it, because I cannot ; I state that there are 
precedents passed sub silentio, where gentlemen after the Union 
having neglected to take the oaths, private acts were brought 
in for their relief. But I put it to the House in its judicial 
capacity ; and, having put it, I shall have it at once, whether 
the Union Act, not having given the power of depriving a rep- 
resentative of his right to sit and vote, the House could do it 
of its own authority, without the warrant of an express law. 
I would respectfully remind honorable members that this oath 
is a species of disherison of the public at large ; I would 
remind them also, that those thus rendered inehgible are ren- 
dered inehgible for no other reason than the conscientious 
respect to the sacred obhgation of an oath. It excludes a 
meritorious class, and admits all who neglect or disregard the 
sanction to which I have referred ; it calls upon the people to 
elect the careless, the fearless, the mendacious, and it proceeds 
upon the bad principle of making a selection of the vicious to 
the exclusion of the conscientious. That being the spirit and 
principle of the law, I humbly submit to the House whether 
it would carry that spirit and principle into specific execution. 
I think if I stood on the Act of Union alone, I should stand 
firmly in this assembly of Christians and gentlemen, calling 



156 SELECT SPEECHES OP DANIEL o'CONNELL. 



upon them not to give effect to tliat vicious principle — not to 
encourage 



clgt 



"The strong antipathy of bad to good ;" 



not to promote tlie choice of such as are hostile to those who 
reverence the sacred obligation of an oath, but to throw open 
the doors as wide as possible to aU who will illustrate this 
assembly by their virtues and their talents. I quit that 
point and come to the next, to which I revert with pleasure, 
I found it on the Belief BiU. 

I insist that the effect of this Eehef BiU is to do away with the 
direction of the Union Act, as far as it relates to oaths. I will 
canvass that proposition first. The Union Act directed that 
these oaths should be taken for a particular period, and for a 
particular period only. The direction is, "And every member 
of the House of Commons in the United Kingdom, in the first 
and all succeeding parliaments, shall, until the Parliament of 
the United Kingdom shall otherwise provide, take the oaths." 
etc. I contend that this direction is at an end — upon this 
direction depends the Oath of Supremacy, and my argument is 
that the period is arrived. The statute uses the adverb " un- 
til " — the provision was merely temporary and the period has 
expired. The Act of Union provides that certain oaths shall 
be taken until something shall happen. Has that happened? 
That is the only question. Let me see whether I can give an 
answer to the question. I say it has : that is my assertion, 
and how do I prove it ? I take up the statute and I find — 
what ? that the Declaration is forever abolished. Has not the 
House, in the words of the Act of Union, " otherwise provided ?" 
This is a penal and restrictive act : it is restrictive of the peo- 
ple's right. I take up the statute and I see that the Parha- 
ment has otherwise provided — ^not for Catholics alone — not 
for Protestants alone ; but for Catholics, Dissenters, and Pro- 
testants — all without limitation or restriction. That the pe- 
riod has arrived, I have distinct evidence in what happened to 
myself at the table. The oaths then tendered to me were dif- 
ferent from those which would have been tendered before the 
13th of April ; the document produced was new : it was fresh 
for the occasion ; it was a novel introduction into the House. 



CLAIMING A SEAT IN PARLIAMENT. 157 

On one side were the oatlis for Protestants, and on the other 
those for the Cathohcs : and why was tliis ? Because the 
Legislature has "otherwise provided" than at the date of 
Union. As one of the representatives of the people, I claim 
the benefit of the provision : I claim to come not within any 
of the oaths. If the new provision has not embraced every 
case, it is either the wisdom or defect of the act ; but either 
in one case or in the other, the time contemplated has come, 
and I claim my right just as if the Union statute did not ex- 
ist. But suppose that what I have said has not convinced 
the House, let me call its attention to *the bill, and remind the 
House that in construing it, there are general principles of 
common sense to enable us to decide on the construction of a 
statute, as well as any bench of judges to decide on any intri- 
cate point of law. 

Previously to the Union and to the passing of the act of 
30 Charles II., the object of the Legislature was to prevent 
Papists from sitting and voting in parhament, and any deci- 
sion of the House upon that statute must be a decision ancil- 
lary to that object. The object of the statute of Charles was 
to exclude Papists ; but here is now before me a statute whose 
object is to open the doors to the Roman Cathohcs, and to 
annihilate the bar that has hitherto impeded their progress. 
First, I say, that this Relief BiU, like many others, sometimes 
takes up a portion of the subject in the middle — then it goes 
at once to the commencement, and again reverts to some other 
part of the subject : at all events it is not so methodical in its 
construction as to enable me to give at once an analysis of its 
contents. The second section provides for the case of all 
Roman Catholics being peers, and it enables them to sit and 
vote on taking the new oaths. It applies as well to the peers 
created in the period that intervened between the statute of 
Charles II. and the present day, as to those peers whose titles 
and rights existed prior to that statute ; of these there were two 
who were deprived, I may now say, because it has been admitted 
in the Legislature, by an unjust attainder — Lord Kenmare and 
Lord Baron Ffrench. They were created peers during the period 
when it was impossible for either of them to exercise the right 
of the peerage by sitting and voting in parliament. This act 



158 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

lias admitted them to those rights. As the prerogative of the 
Crown has been restored to its full effect by means of this stat- 
ute, so the right of representation has been made an equal 
right : as the royal prerogative has been perfectly successful, 
the privilege of the people ought to be equally potential. 
There are, however, these words in the second section : " or 
who shall after the commencement of the act be returned as 
a member of the House of Commons to sit and vote in either 
House of Parliament respectively." After the passing of the 
act everybody is to be entitled to the benefit ; and I beg the 
House to reflect that if I.be not by the second section included, 
I am not excluded by it ; though it does not affirmatively estab- 
lish my right, it does not negative it by any enactment ; it may 
not be sufficient to admit me, but there is nothing to shut me 
out. One point alone includes me, and it is a point of legal 
construction, depending on the authority of cases which I 
shall not now analyze. I might do so as a lawyer, were I ad- 
dressing a bench of judges, but before a popular assembly, I 
ought not to occupy time in any such attempt. I only allude 
to them in order that if a court should hereafter decide that 
my argument is valid, it would impose upon me the necessity 
of taking no oaths at all, or else protect me against the exac- 
tion of the penalty. 

The construction which a lawyer may put upon the statute, 
I apprehend, would be, that he who was returned before the 
passing of the act, was embraced within its provisions ; and 
the House will give me leave just to mention that it has lately 
been solemnly decided in the case of a will, that notwithstand- 
ing the peculiar wording of it, children born after the date of 
the instrument, were included in its provisions. I will only 
remind the House of these technical rules, which I trust will 
never be carried into effect at the expense of any whom I am 
addressing. I repeat, that if the second section does not 
include, it does not exclude me. It may be said that it was 
framed for other objects — to let in persons who have claims 
like those of the Earl of Surrey ; and here let me claim the 
assistance of the legal gentlemen in the House. Beyond a 
doubt — and I call their particular attention to the fact — if the 
second section does not aid me, it cannot possibly injure my 



CLAIMING A SEAT IN PAELIAMENT. 159 

right to sit and vote. I come then at once to the right — I 
come to it under the tenth section of the act ; and I implore 
you to forgive me for trespassing so long upon other matters, 
when I have this section before me, which seems to render 
doubt impossible. 

"And be it enacted, that it shall be lawful for any of his Majesty's 
subjects professing the Roman Catholic religion, to hold, exercise, and 
enjoy all civil and military offices and places of trust and profit under 
his Majesty, his heirs or successors, and to exercise any other franchise 
or civil right, except as hereinafter excepted, upon taking and sub- 
scribing at the times and in the manner hereinafter mentioned, the oath 
hereinbefore appointed and set forth, instead of the oaths of allegiance, su- 
premacy, and abjuration, and instead of such other oath or oaths as are, 
or may be, now by law required to be taken for the purpose aforesaid, 
by any of his Majesty's subjects professing the Roman Catholic religion." 

I claim the benefit of that section ; it is plain and distinct, 
and includes no technical subtleties; there is nothing to 
throw a cloud over its clearness, and having read it, I might 
stand upon that alone. If then I touch upon other matters, 
it is only because, not having the right of reply, it is necessary 
for me to endeavor to anticipate. If, in my anxiety to remove 
aU objections and obstacles, I attribute to honorable members 
weak arguments they would not have used, and which they 
may gravely disclaim, I hope I shall be forgiven. This sec- 
tion introduces the franchise ; in common parlance, indeed, 
the franchise was introduced before, because the fifth section 
provides that Eoman Catholics shall vote at all elections of 
cities, counties, and towns ; and it provides a new oath to be 
taken. Therefore as far as franchise can mean the elective 
franchise, the act is so intentionally extensive, that it uses the 
word unnecessarily, perhaps, again. Nay, more, the franchise 
connected with corporations is actually mentioned again in 
the fourth section ; thus in the fifth section it means one spe- 
cies of franchise, in the tenth section another, and in the four- 
teenth a third. For fear any franchise should be omitted 
and forgotten, lest any party should by chance be excluded 
from the benefits, which I hope and trust will flow from the 
act, the word franchise is to be found in three different parts 
of it. It then goes on to give all civil rights, excepting such 



160 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

as are liereinafter mentioned. The first question is, -whether 
the right of sitting and voting in parhament be hereinafter 
excepted ? I meet that with a direct negative — it is not ; but 
there are offices excepted in the twelfth section, such as guar- 
dians and justices of the United Kingdom, the Kegent of the 
United Kingdom, Lord High Chancellor, Lord Keeper, Lord 
Lieutenant of Ireland, and High Commissioner to the General 
Assembly of the Church of Scotland. In the fifteenth section 
also, the civil rights are excepted, which might be exercised 
for ecclesiastical promotion, and for presentation to livings in 
the gift of corporations. These do not include the right for 
which I contend, and I shall not detain the House bj going 
through the act more minutely. I have read it attentively, 
and I can assert that I find in it no such exception. I shall 
be asked, perhaps, whether the right to sit and vote be a civil 
right ? And I would reply, if I were permitted to do so, by 
asking another question — if it be not a civil right, what is 
it ? I have looked into law books with a view to this ques- 
tion of civil right, and I find that Mr. Justice Blackstone, in 
his Commentaries, has divided the whole law into rights and 
wrongs. On the front of his book is found the very right to 
sit and vote in parliament. But I appeal to common sense 
and common understanding, is it not a civil right ? Must it 
not be a civil right ? In the section itself I find civil contra- 
distinguished from mihtary — that Koman Catholics may " en- 
joy all civil and mihtary offices." The section itself, therefore, 
explains the meaning of the term. But, travelhng out of the 
section, and resorting to those who have best defined the mean- 
ing of the words in the Enghsh language, what do we find ? 
Dr. Johnson teUs us that " civil " is an adjective which means 
"relating to the community," "pohtical: relating to the city 
or government." Now, " pohtical " and " ci"\al " must, by the 
by, mean the same thing ; the only difference being that one 
word is from the Greek, and the other from the Latin. They 
are synonymous and identical, and no man can deny that sit- 
ting and voting is both a pohtical and ci^dl right. 

The example given by Spratt fuUy supports this assertion — 
" but there is another unity which would be most advanta- 
geous to our country, and that is your endeavor, a civil politi- 
cal union in the whole nation." 



CLAIMING A SEAT IN PAELIAMENT. 161 

The definition and description necessarily include tlie 
right I claim ; but let us see what is the definition of that 
word " right." After giving other significations, Dr. Johnson 
proceeds to the third sense of "right," which is " claim," and 
he follows it by others, such as : " that which justly be- 
longs to one," — " property, interest," — " power, prerogative," 
— " immunity, privilege," — in short, there is not one of these 
significations that is more comprehensive than I desire it to 
be. He inserts the following example of Sir Walter Raleigh, 
of "just claim." " The Boman Catholic citizens were, by the 
sword, taught to acknowledge the Pope their Lord, though 
they knew not by what right." This is a plain definition and 
description of civil right. It cannot mean " franchise," because 
franchisement has already been included — ^it cannot mean 
" property," because property is included in the twenty-third 
section of the act, which requires no oath at all for enjoyment 
of it : — from and after the passage of this act, no oath or 
oaths shall be tendered to, or required to be taken by, his 
Majesty's subjects professing the Eoman Catholic religion, for 
enabling them to hold or enjoy any real or personal property." 
Thus, then, " civil right," in this act, does not mean proper- 
ty ; it does not mean franchise, but it means, a just claim, a 
political privilege, an immunity of any Idnd whatever. Com- 
mon sense here shows what the law sanctions — ^that by civil 
right, necessarily must be included the right to sit and vote. 
Another observation is, that this section relates to the time 
and manner of taking the oaths; but suppose I were to concede 
that no time and manner are expressed, yet the civil right 
being granted under the oaths directed, and the time and man- 
ner being the only condition, necessarily would supply the 
condition. We have in the nineteenth section the mode of 
taking the oaths for corporate offices, and in the twentieth, the 
time and manner of taking the oaths for their offices ; but I 
will not detain the House upon that point, because in the 
twenty-third section the Legislature has wisely provided for 
the case. It declares : 

"That the oafch herein appointed to be taken and subscribed in any of 
the courts, or before any of the persons above-mentioned, shall be of 
the same force and effect, to all intents and piu'ijoses as, and shall stand 



162 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

in the place of, all oaths and declarations, required and prescribed hy 
any law now in force for the relief of his Majesty's Roman CathoUc 
subjects from any disabilities, incapacities, or penalties." 

However, as tliere is no punctuation in acts of parliament, I 
shall not trouble the House with any special pleading on par- 
ticular words, but come to the remaining and distinct portion 
of the section : 

"And the proper officer of any of the courts above mentioned, in 
which any persons professing the Roman Catholic religion, shall demand 
to take and subscribe the oaths herein appointed and set forth, is hereby 
authorized and required to administer the oath to such person : and such 
officer shall make^ sign, and deliver a certificate of such oath having 
been duly taken and subscribed. ' 

There is the time, and that time is when it is demanded. 
The courts are also specified, viz., the King's Bench, Com- 
mon Pleas, Exchequer, and Chancery. The time is as univer- 
sal as the benefit of the statute was intended to be, and every- 
thing is complete to my purpose. The objection vanishes, 
because the time is as extensive as can be demanded. I have 
taken that oath in one of the courts named. I am ready to 
prove it. I produced the certificate at the table ; and having 
taken that oath, and produced that certificate, I turn round 
and ask, why am I not allowed to exercise my rights ? Let it 
be remembered that my case cannot be drawn into precedent ; 
it can never occur again ; and I ask the House, in construing 
the act, whether it intends to make it an outlawry against a 
single individual. If the act were meant to meet my case, 
why was not my case specified in it ? It existed when the 
act was passed : it was upon the records of the House, for a 
committee had sat while the bUl was pending, and had given 
in its report upon oath. Why, I ask again, was not my case 
specified? Because it was not intended to be included? 
"Where, then, is the individual who would think it ought to be 
included ? Let me call the attention of the House to the re- 
cital of the statute. 

"Whereas, by various acts of parliament, certain restraints and disa- 
bilities are imposed on the Roman CathoHc subjects of his Majesty, to 
which other of his Majesty's subjects are not liable, " 



CLAIMING A SEAT IN PAKLIAMENT. 163 

It includes all restraints and disabilities affecting Eoman 
Catholics ; and proceeds — 

" And whereas it is expedient that such restraints and disabilities shall 
be henceforth discontinued ; and whereas bj various acts, certain oaths 
and certain declarations, etc., are or may be required to be taken, made, 
and subscribed by the subjects of his Majesty, as qualifications for sitting 
and voting in parliament, and for the enjoyment of certain offices, fran- 
chises, and civil rights ; Be it enacted, etc., that such restraints and dis- 
abilities shall be from henceforth discontinued. " 

All are to be discontinued. What do I claim ? That they 
shall be discontinued. It is a maxim of law that the recital of 
statute shall not control the enactments ; but with this qualifi- 
cation, that although a particular recital cannot control a gen- 
eral enactment, there is no rule of law that a general recital 
shall not explain a particular enactment. But I have a gen- 
eral recital, and a general enactment too, in my favor. 

If to sit and vote be not a civil right, what civil right was 
intended by the word, for every other is provided for ? Why 
should this be excluded ? Look at the recital and look at the 
intention of the statute, and shall I then be told that a doubt 
can arise as to the right to sit and vote ? If I have not that right, 
what is to be done ? Is the statute of Charles II., enabling 
the House to exclude me, still in force ? What is to become 
of me ? Am I to remain the representative for Clare ? Will 
the House not let me in, and is not able to turn me out? 
What, I ask again, is to become of me? The statute of 
Charles II. imposed penalties for not taking the oaths and 
signing the declaration : among others there was a pecuniary 
penalty, and it continued in force until the union with Ireland. 
The first question I would ask the lawyers of the House then 
is this : Did the Union Act continue those penalties ? I take 
upon me to say it did not. Then, I ask, can any penalty or 
punishment be continued on a free-born British subject, 
when an Act of Parhament, like that of the Union, is silent, 
and contains no enactment as to penalty ? That is a question 
of constitutional law ; and if I were sued to-morrow for the 
penalty of five hundred pounds, I should, of course, instantly 
demur. If I am right in that position — if the penalty of five 
hundred pounds could not be recovered, shall the greater inflic- 



164: SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

tion remain ? When courts of justice would refuse to enforce 
tlie fine, shall this House take the law into its own hands and 
deprive me of what ought to be more precious — the right to 
sit and vote as the representative of a divided, a disinherited, 
and, I had almost said, a martyred people. 

The Union statute, I apprehend, would alone be sufficient ; 
but I do not stand on that merely. This Relief Bill has abol- 
ished the oaths and Declaration, and abolished with it the pun- 
ishment for not taking the one and subscribing the other. If 
the Declaration be abolished, does the pecuniary penalty re- 
main ? I answer, no. And if the pecuniary penalty do not 
remain, does the heavier penalty of exclusion continue ? Cer- 
tainly not ; and I respectfully submit to the House that it has 
not now jurisdiction to prevent the exercise of my civil right 
of sitting and voting here. I acknowledge that I should take 
the oath prescribed by the Behef BiU ; and then let any indi- 
vidual, by favor of justice, bring an action against me, and if 
the court should determine that I ought to pay the penalty of 
X500, my exclusion follows as a matter of course. The House 
should consider that this is a large and comprehensive enact- 
ment ; and I ask why the House should interfere in my case, 
and not leave it to the courts of justice ? I do not want this 
House to yield its privileges to the decision of any court or 
tribunal in existence ; but I wish to show that the House, by 
deciding with me, could not preclude anybody from tiying the 
question legally. It is to put my case into that transfer of 
decision that I am arguing here : that is the utmost I strug- 
gle for. The question is : Is it not my right on this return to 
take the seat to which I have been duly elected by the people? 
Is the question free from doubt ? If there be a doubt, I am 
entitled to the benefit of that doubt. 

I maintain that I have a constitutional right, founded on 
the return of the sheriff and the voice of the people ; and if 
there be a doubt on the subject it should be removed. The 
statute comes before us to be construed fi'om the first clause. 
I did — and I am not ashamed to 0"v\ra it — I did defer to the 
opinion of others, and was averse to calling for that construc- 
tion ; and if it had not been for the interest of those who sent 
me here, my own right should have been buried in obHvion. 



SPEECH AT THE SECOND CLAEE ELECTION. 165 

But now I require the House to consider it. Will you decide 
that a civil right does not mean a civil right ? And if this 
case of mine be not excepted, will you add it as an additional 
exception ? It might have been said by some of those who 
supported the bill, that it was intended by that measure to 
compensate a nation for bygone wrongs, and to form the 
foundation stone of a solid and substantial building, to be 
consecrated to the unity and peace of the empire. But if 
what is certain may be disturbed — if what words express may 
be erased — ^if civil rights may be determined not to be civil 
rights — if we are to be told that by some excuse, or by some 
pretext, what is not uncertain may be made so — we shall be 
put under an impossibihty to know what construction we must 
hereafter place on the statutes. I have endeavored to treat 
this House with respect. My title to sit in it is clear and 
plain ; and I contend that the statute is all comprehensive in its 
intention, in its recital, and in its enactments. It comprehends 
every measure and principle of relief, with such exceptions 
as are thereinafter excepted. But while I show my respect 
to the House, I stand here on my right, and claim the benefit 
of it. 



SPEECH AT THE SECOND CLAEE ELECTION. 



[Mr. O'Connell arose and placed his hand several times upon his 
breast during the acclamations, evidently under the influence of 
powerful emotions.] 

I accept the trust, not with any presumptuous confidence in 
my own abihties, but simply with an honesty of intuition, and 
purity of motive. We have procured Emancipation, from the 
moral condition of the people, from that high enhghtenment 
they had acquired from their submission, their obedience to 
the laws, from their respect to the many ordinances of man 
and laws of God. 

It was impossible that that measure could be any longe^" 
withheld — but I complain of the results of that measure ; I 



166 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

complain that since it lias passed, four months have now 
elapsed and there has not been an effort employed on the 
part of the government, nor any disposition manifested to do 
away with the distinctions which then existed and which still 
continue to exist in the country. No, they are still kept ahve 
as much as ever, and up to the period at which I now speak, 
there does not appear a single Cathohc who has derived the 
least benefit from the measure. In speaking of your having 
elected me now, I shall stUl point out to you — I feel it my duty 
to do so — the injustice which has been done to you and me 
when the last election was made the subject of discussion in 
the House, and I must say that it has anything but my 
respect or submission upon that occasion. I heard the inso- 
lent opinion of the speaker pronounced, and, though I am 
well aware of the little and contemptible motives by which he 
was actuated ; although I am well aware that they are of that 
description which the character of the sex from which they 
emanated should consign to silence, I shall not say anything 
more about them now, but the time shall come when with 
your voice I will bring this matter forth. Upon that occa- 
sion, too, I have to complain of the conduct of a certain pro- 
fession, a profession to which I once considered it an honor to 
belong. I allude to the profession of the bar. 

The bar, in my opinion, have disgraced themselves in the 
discussion of my case, before the House of Commons. I put 
forward, upon that occasion, my opinions as to my right to sit 
and vote. I proved my right to sit and vote by the existing 
law. There was not one who came forward either by pam- 
phlet or letter to contradict my statement. If they had done 
so in print, I would immediately have annihilated them. Mr. 
Sugden committed one of the most egregious errors that ever 
a lawyer of any country was guilty of, upon that occasion. 
Mr. Tyndal waited, and in a dry, hum-drum form of a speech 
in parliament, opposed me. It was a poor, miserable attempt at 
a speech, and this man has since become the Lord Chief-Jus- 
tice of England, That country is to be pitied that has such a 
judge. It is melancholy to reflect that elevation can be easily 
procured by abandonment of principle. There was another 
who opposed me — Mr. Sugden, one who has lately made him- 



SPEECH AT THE SECOND CLAEE ELECTION. 167 

seK very remarkable by some ridiculous observation, but 
whose name Las not been introduced to-day. He committed 
an egregious blunder, and I nailed it to bim. The first who 
opposed me, has since become a Chief-Justice, whilst another 
has been appointed his Majesty's Attorney-General for Eng- 
land. 

I cannot express the sentiments of abhorrence and contempt 
I entertain for the opinion pronounced by Sir James Scarlett. 
He was favorable in opinion to me, so much so that Mr. Hut- 
chinson, the member for Mallow, and others, told me they 
were convinced by the reasonings of Sir James Scarlett ; yet 
this man afterwards voted against me. Thus I was put down 
by parliamentary magic and two lawyers, both of whom are 
promoted, and one of whom advocated my cause at one period. 
I must, however, do justice to that portion of the profession 
who acted nobly, consistently, and honorably. I cannot be 
unmindful of the splendid aid of Henry Brougham, that man 
of unrivalled talent, who possesses more information than any 
other man I ever met. Oh, yes ; it gladdens my heart to 
reflect that I had such a man at my side, the brightest orna- 
ment in the British House of Commons, the statesman, the 
orator, the lawyer, the man of science, and the philosopher. 
There were others too who supported me. I cannot omit the 
names of Duncannon, Ebrington, of Bice, of Lloyd. 

[Yes, and said some individual, the Knight of Kerry.] 

Oh ; as to the Knight of Kerry, I hardly consider it a 
debt I owe him, to enumerate his distinguished name, one of 
the most honest men who ever entered into the House of Com- 
mons. There were also many who supported me among the 
high famihes of England. The illustrious name of Grey can 
never be forgotten by me. I had his distinguished support. 
The decision, notwithstanding all, was against me. It was a 
decision in the face of the law. I told them so before the bar 
of the House — that there was an injustice done me, and an 
injustice in my person done to you. As far as I am concerned 
nothing shall prevent me tearing away the veil and showing 
the administration in all its naked deformity, for the purpose 
of saving the country for the King and the people. I shall 



168 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

next allude to the destruction of the CathoKc Association. It 
certainly reminds me — in truth it does, of the immortal Alexan- 
der, who " twice had slew the slain," — it was a most unneces- 
sary measure, for the Association had previously performed a 
virtual suicide. It was frightful to consider the consequence 
of that act ; it is a despotic power put into the hands of the 
Viceroy, and I complain of it because it bears, without dis- 
tinction, upon all classes. I shall not be one fortnight in the 
House until I caU for its repeal. I shall demand, too, the re- 
peal of that act which deprived the virtuous forty-shilling 
freeholders of their franchise — an act which robbed two hun- 
dred and fifty thousand of the elective franchise in one day. 
The disfranchisement of the forty-shilling freeholders was 
a breach of the Union. It Avas the basis of the Union that 
the country should be represented by the forty-shilHng free- 
holders among the constituency of the country, for the pur- 
pose of placing the representation of both kingdoms upon an 
equaUzation ; that equahzation was now destroyed — the basis 
of the Union was therefore destroyed, and the measure was 
grossly violated in this instance. Standing here now, as I do, 
for the first time, the undisputed member of the county of 
Clare, I pledge myself to have those virtuous men restored to 
their rights. As a favorable result of emancipation, and a 
disposition to dispense justice, the Ministry point, no doubt, 
to the late proclamation for the dispersion of Orange assem- 
blies. I win admit this, but I am at liberty to canvass this 
proclamation ; it came a week just too late. I went, about a 
week before the fatal occurrence which called it forth, to Lord 
Levison Gower, and told him my apprehensions ; I told him 
I feared, if some timely and salutary measures were not taken, 
that sixty individuals, at least, would fall victims to Orange 
butchery. In a week afterwards the proclamation is issued ; 
it reminds me of the familiar adage, that "he was a good 
servant who locked the stable door when the steed was stolen." 
His master had certainly good reason to congratulate himseK 
on the services of such a servant. There was no proclama- 
tion as long as the people lay quiet, as long as they laid them- 
selves down to the fury of the Orange gang, as long as they 
patiently submitted to the sword ; as long as all this continued 



SPEECH AT THE SECOND CLAEE ELECTION. 169 

there was no proclamation ; but when the battle of Mackeon 
took place, which was gallant and victorious to the Catholics, 
then the proclamation was issued. 

I shall now address you on a subject more closely allied to 
your feelings, and I address you with pain, as I have to allude 
to myself. What, I ask, can I do for Clare ? I will tell you 
what I can't do, I cannot provide any one among you with 
place, pension, or office. I cannot meet the expectation of 
any one in this way. I don't care what the administration 
may be, I shall always be hke the shepherd's dog, watching 
to mark where the rights and liberties of the people shall be 
infringed upon, to sound the alarm, to protect them from dan- 
ger. The first object to which my attention shall be directed, 
is to hold out the olive branch of peace to all — to reconcile 
the temporary separation between landlord and tenant — to 
engender those kindly and affectionate feelings between those 
respective classes which ought forever to exist, and, if possible, 
ought never to have suffered estrangement or ahenation. 
Upon the occasion of the last election, there were many and 
many who opposed me, who are now disposed to give me 
their support — and there were many who were actuated in 
that opposition by the most honorable motives. There is Mr. 
Vesey Fitzgerald, too, of whom I can scarcely speak in ade- 
quate terms of eulogy. I should be base, indeed, if I did not 
bestow upon him the commendations he deserves. The Cath- 
olics turned him out of the county, and the revenge which he 
practiced, was one of the best speeches I ever heard in their 
favor. It was one of the greatest instances of generosity, 
which I ever before witnessed. I consider Mr. Yesey Fitz- 
gerald one of the ablest men in the cabinet, and if he were not 
encumbered with a certain peculiarity approacliing to diffi- 
dence in his own powers, frequently the companion of great 
merit — he would be the first man in the cabinet. I shall now 
turn to my public duties, and it may be asked, what are my 
qualifications ? I say it unaffectedly, I am no orator. I am 
a "plain blunt man," who speaks the plain language. My 
forensic habits have given me a facihty in delivering my sen- 
timents as they occur to my mind, without humming, or hav- 
ing to look for a better word. I have no pretensions to poetry. 



170 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

/ The Muses liave never hovered over me with their zephyr- 
I airy wings, or carried me aloft on those wild and ethereal voy- 
i ages of fancy which are taken by her favorite votaries. I 
I come, as I have said, to the House of Commons, a plain work- 
/ ing man, with honesty of intentions — a man of business. That 
' man must be an early riser who is up before me ; and he must 
be a sober fellow who goes to bed with a more sober head than 
I do. When I go over to the House of Commons, it is my 
intention to be there from the moment that prayers begin 
until the moment that all the business is over. I will be 
the first in the House and I shall be last out. I will read 
every bill, every word of it. I come now, to what I con- 
sider my duties with regard to rehgion. If any question 
should come before the House on the subject of the discipline 
of the Estabhshed Church, I shah immediately walk out. I 
shall leave Protestants to deal with what leads to their own 
spiritual concerns. I should wish the same for myself, and I 
will do as I would be done by. But with respect to the tem- 
porahties of the Established Church, that is totally another 
subject. I should wish to bring about a suitable equahzation 
of church property, not that thousands of curates should hard- 
ly have the means of subsistence, while the bishops were riot- 
ing in luxury. The former have only £15 a year, while many 
of the bishops have twenty thousand ! The time is approach- 
ing when the system of tithes must be abohshed. France is 
now comfortable in the abolition of its tithes. If no one will 
introduce the subject, I will introduce it myself. I know that 
I shall have more Protestants than any other class to join me 
in this measm'e. I shaU endeavor to put an end to the per- 
petually returning litigation to which the Cathohcs and Dis- 
senters are subject, by these primeval transfers of deeds, which 
were a consuming gangrene to both Dissenters and Catholics 
in their pubhc charities. I shall endeavor to protect them by 
I the law, free from litigation. I go into parhament for freedom 
for all men — Jew and Gentile, Heathen and Christian. I ex- 
! cept, however, the subjects of that abominable monopoly, the 
East India Company, who still keep the abominations of the 
idol Juggernaut. I would leave those people to their supersti- 
tions, endeavoring to convince them by every reasonable argu- 



SPEECH AT THE SECOND CLAKE ELECTION. 171 

ment, but I shoiild neither support nor encourage them, nor 
support those who would do so either. I would place no limit 
to the freedom of the human mind. But I shall pass fi^om 
these subjects, to those of much more interest. 

Let me draw your attention to a system of oaths, a horrible 
system of oaths. There are no less a number of oaths required 
to be taken in various public departments than seventeen or 
eighteen hundred. There are a multitude of oaths in the ex- 
cise, and I shall make it my business to call for a hst of all 
the public oaths which are now required to be taken in various 
departments, for the purpose of having them abohshed. I 
condemn the taking of oaths altogether. The next subject to 
which I shall call your attention is that of parhamentary reform. 
I consider that it is calculated to give security to property and 
safety to life. I claim, in a word, for the people at large a 
full and free representatiou. I profess myself a radical reform- 
er. The voting should be by ballot, and carried on regularly 
in the parish in which each individual hved. I may be asked 
what are my sentiments respecting the duration of parhament. 
I will not quarrel much about that, but I am an advocate for 
full, free, and frequent parhaments. The parhament anterior 
to the year 1688 was triennial. For my part, in this particu- 
lar, I must say I am much attached to biennial parliaments. 
From this subject, I shall now turn to that of the Eepeal of the 
Union. I may be asked, shall I be able to effect this. "Who 
would be beheved if, two years ago, he should have been haz- 
ardous enough to say, that this day I would stand the unques- 
tioned representative of the County of Clare ? I know that in 
seeking the Eepeal of the Union, I shall have the support of 
the Corporation of Dublua, however opposed to me upon other 
subjects. 

I now come to that species of reform which is the ob- 
ject of my darhng sohcitude — the reform of law. The gov- 
ernment should pay all the expenses ; there should be no hire- 
ling advocacy. Prosecutors never see one another until they 
are brought into court, and their case comes on in the shape 
of a record. In every case of htigation, the contending par- 
ties should previously see one another, the judge explain the 
laws, and I have no doubt that under those circumstances a 



172 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

mutual compromise and arrangement would take place before 
the parties would leave the court. There is one subject more 
to which I shall advert. I am the respecter of authority. If 
calumny assail the Throne, then private hfe cannot be secure. 
I have read with horror some details of a distinguished indi- 
vidual in the London newspapers. The story of Captain 
Garth, however, must come to light, and the Duke of Cumber- 
land, I have no doubt, will be freed from the foul calumny with 
which he has been assailed. No — I shall not see the brother 
of my King attacked. I am no respecter of persons, but I 
will call for and demand investigation into this transaction. 
There is a moral progress at present in the world. There is 
no true basis for liberty but religion. 



SPEECH ON THE IRISH COEECION BILL. 

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEBRUAEY 19, 1833. 



I WISH for a few minutes to attract the attention of the 
House to the situation of my long afflicted and much oppressed 
country. I do so at the earliest opportunity, because I wish 
to express to this House of Commons the situation in which 
that country is like to be placed. I shall, as far as I can, sup- 
press my emotions of indignation, and no longer follow my 
natural impulses. I shall not, whatever I may think, call the 
measure propounded for my country a bloody or a brutal one ; 
but at the same time I wish to be distinctly understood not 
in any degree retracting the epithets which I have applied to 
the conduct of his Majesty's ministers. Whilst, however, I ab- 
stain from characterizing in harsh or strong language the pro- 
ceedings of government, I do not in the least compromise my 
opinions or cease from holding them in abhorrence. There 
are injuries of that nature that are too degrading for descrip- 
tion, and of too deep and vital consequence to allow of person- 
ahties or admit of personal considerations. I shall therefore 
abstain from both, and in discussing the subject which I am 
about to bring forward, I shall not only avoid personal but 



SPEECH ON THE IRISH COERCION BILL. 173 

local considerations, and hope that nothing except my accent 
shall on the occasion discover me to be an Irishman. 

I stand up here not merely to defend Irish rights, but I 
speak as if I were speaking of Enghsh, Scotch, or universal 
liberty ; in fact, it is as a defender of the last that I stand up 
to protest against certain proceedings which I understand are 
now in contemplation. Let it not however be supposed that 
oppression is the less abhorrent to me because I am less vio- 
lent in manner, and least of all, it should not be supposed that 
a quietness of demeanor on the part of a people is an indica- 
tion of a less determination of purpose. Death is preferable 
to oppression, and the people of Ireland, though tranquil, will 
not be the more submissive to the yoke which is to be imposed 
upon them. For my own part, the iron has not as yet entered 
into my soul ; and notwithstanding the foUy and the madness 
of the Administration, I have still a confiding hope in the 
integrity of the Keformed House of Commons. Before I pro- 
ceed to the consideration of a measure, which has been intro- 
duced elsewhere, I wish to set myself right in regard to some 
statements, which have been made respecting me. It has 
been asserted that I encouraged certain tithe meetings, and 
that when I had called those assemblages together, I had 
shrunk from attendance. I here at once declare and sohcit 
a denial, if it can be given, if there is any truth in this state- 
ment. In point of fact, there is no truth in it ; there was not 
only no such thing, but there was no foundation for it ; and 
any assertion more destitute of the semblance of truth was 
never made. The fact is, that I was not even in Ireland at 
the time of the meetings referred to, and could not by possi- 
bility have undertaken to attend ; and if a Committee of In- 
quiry were granted to me, I would undertake to prove to 
demonstration, that the meetings of which I am said to be the 
originator, were got up by the friends of Lord Anglesea. I 
was, at the time, at the distance of three hundred miles from 
those meetings, and I appeal to this House whether it is fair 
to impose upon me the responsibility of meetings in which I 
had no concern. Over and over again have the acts of others 
been laid at my door, and without expressing any opinion 
upon the propriety of these meetings, I ask whether it is fair 



174: SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

to impute to me acts in wliicli I have had no participation ? I 
have been frequently calumniated when I only asked to be heard 
in reply. I court investigation into my conduct, and I defy 
the most rigid scrutiny. Enough, however, of this subject ; I 
liave something more important to attract the attention of the 
House ; important, though it bears the marks of driveUing old 
age, and the total absence of a manly character. 

It would probably be thought that some of the measures of 
government were of a healing and salutary nature, and that 
ministers had shown that they were well disposed toward 
Ireland. 

Let the House recollect what the ministers have done. 
They have indeed boasted of their church reform, and, as far 
as that goes, I accept it as a boon. What is it after all? 
The shght benefits it ^confers are prospective. It holds out no 
present advantages. ' True, it was a boon as far as the vestry 
cess, which, according to the statement of the noble lord, was 
sixty or seventy thousand pounds a year. The' noble lord, in 
stating that as the amount of the vestry cess, stated also that 
the income of the clergy was about seven hundred thousand 
pounds. Did the noble lord, did any person who knew any- 
thing about Ireland, think or believe that the vestry cess 
amounted to one tenth of the income of the Protestant clergy 
of Ireland ? Let me, however, not be misunderstood. I ac- 
cept that boon and accept it gratefully, trifling as it is. At 
the same time, I wish the House to know that it is only a 
small rehef from large and vexatious grievances. I do not 
retract one expression of approbation at the measure of the 
noble lord, not because I think it of any benefit, but because 
I recognize in his mind a good principle. It recognized this, 
that the state had a right to dispose of church property, and 
it incidentally admitted that .the church estabhshment was 
disproportioned to the wants or wishes of the country. 

The noble lord had announced to the House that he meant 
to reduce a certain number of bishops ; but that reduction did 
not embrace any lessening of the amount to be paid to the 
estabhshment. What could be more ridiculous than off'ering 
that as a boon which in no way lessened taxation ? The far- 
mer, under the measure, would not have to pay less of tithes, 



SPEECH ON THE lEISH COEECION BILL. 175 

nor would the peasant have to pay a less contribution of his 
potatoes. Some few nights since, the right honorable Secre- 
tary for Ireland, had expressed himself in terms of kindness 
towards the Irish, and without scrutinizing the motives of the 
right honorable Secretary, I received those expressions with 
grateful emotion. I advert to this for the purpose of show- 
ing that I consider the present measures, not as the acts of 
the right honorable Secretary, but as those of the government, 
and upon that government I was at once disposed to throw the 
whole responsibility. With that government I shall at once 
grapple, and though I may be laughed at, I will still appeal 
to the House of Commons, and until they have betrayed them- 
selves, I shall never beUeve that they will consent to any act 
which would annihilate every trace of pubhc freedom. Would 
they allow such a measure as now propounded to be enacted for 
England or for Scotland ? Certainly not. Why then tolerate 
it for Ireland ? This was, however, a matter for the considera- 
tion of the House of Commons," and in rising upon this occa- 
sion, my object is more to elicit the opinions of others than to 
express any of my own. The Irish are often reproached with 
acrimony, and perhaps there is some truth in the observation. 
But that is foreign from the subject : and even if true, the 
question is, is there any ground for the acrimony ? However, 
there is another question ; the real one is, whether this 
House is pledged to adopt coercive measures towards Ire- 
land ? True it is, they voted for the Address, but they were 
not therefore pledged to any particular line of coercive mea- 
sures ; and I, for one, can never believe, until I see it, that a 
reformed House of Commons will, by supporting a govern- 
ment, vote for the degradation of the Irish people. 

The House has gone a great way in supporting ministers, 
but they will halt when the progress of government is toward 
despotism. And I would repeat that the government will never 
be supported in any measures that will tend to Irish degrada- 
tion. The Under Secretary of the Treasury had, in some cal- 
culation which he had brought before the House, attempted 
to show that the connection between England and Ireland was 
most beneficial to the latter, and he flung back upon me the 
imputation of having misrepresented the views of government. 



176 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

The Under Secretary flung back, witli apparent indignation, 
my charges that the government meant to supersede the Con- 
stitution and suspend the Habeas Corpus Act. Now, I ask 
the House whether I was right in my anticipations. If I was 
right, the Under Secretary is now bound to come forward and 
support me. 

Is there any intention of suspending the Habeas Corpus Act? 
Is there any intention of subverting the constitution as far as 
regarded Ireland? Perhaps there is not ; if so, I am certainly 
in error. But I am right. I call upon the Under Secretary, 
instead of pronouncing me a calumniator, to come forward 
and support me. However that may be, I will state this 
much : that the measure which I understand is in contempla- 
tion, is bottomed on the most glaring and notorious falsehoods. 
It is but a sample of the many acts of Whig treachery which 
have been practiced towards Ireland. It is one of those black 
and gloomy spots which indicate Whig ascendency. That fac- 
tion has always been hostile and faithless to Ireland. They 
were in power when Limerick surrendered, and the conduct of 
the brave men who commanded that garrison presented a 
striking contrast to that of the Whigs. On that occasion a 
convention was signed, and immediately afterwards a French 
armament appeared in the bay and proffered assistance to the 
garrison ; but the brave and gallant army, who had once 
pHghted then- honor, refused their assistance and stood firm 
to their honor. They had signed the treaty, and from their 
signatures they would not depart. Yet, these were the people 
upon whom the Whigs attempted every atrocity. They are to 
be subjected to martial law and to be deprived of every indem- 
nity in case of false accusation. They cannot even appear at 
prayer meetings, and in case of any charge against them, they 
are not to be tried in their own counties, but the venue is to be 
changed. 

Me. 0. W. Wynn rose to order. I vniih. to know whether it 
is competent for any member in this House to refer to proceed- 
ings elsewhere; whether, in point of fact, those proceedings 
might, or might not, come under their notice. 

Me. O'Connell. — I have cautiously abstained from alluding 
to proceedings in another place, and merely supposed that 



SPEECH ON THE lEISH COEECION BILL. 177 

such proceedings were in contemplation. The King's minis- 
ters are reported and believed to intend to introduce into the 
House certain measures. 

The Speakee said there could be no doubt that what the 
right honorable gentleman said was strictly in accordance with 
the rules of the House ; but the question to be considered was, 
did it apply to the course of observation pursued by the hon- 
orable and learned member ? It was not only contrary to the 
rules of that House for any honorable member to discuss a 
measure only before the other House of Parhament, but it 
would be extremely inconvenient. The great difficulty, how- 
ever, the Chair felt in all such cases, was, to know whether 
the honorable gentleman was merely alluding to matters of 
notoriety or to measures generally, or by him attributed to 
government, or whether he was alluding to a particular mea- 
sure before the other House ? He was quite sure that what 
had fallen from the right honorable gentleman was perfectly 
in consonance with the rules of the House ; and he was also 
quite sure that it would also have the effect of putting the 
honorable and learned gentleman on his guard, and prevent 
the possibility of his infringing upon those wholesome regu- 
lations. 

Me. O'Connell. — The courtesy and distinctness of the de- 
cision of the Chair must ensure my prompt and perfect com- 
phance. I say, then, that I speak not of what has occurred in 
another place. But my course of conduct is this : — his Ma- 
jesty's government ask the House of Commons to confirm a 
vote of supply for three thousand pounds ; and I take this 
opportunity to call the attention of the House to the pohcy of 
government. Further, I attribute to that government certain 
schemes, to which I feel it necessary to call attention, as in 
voting supphes the House sanctioned the conduct of govern- 
ment. One of the schemes with which I charge the govern- 
ment is, an intention to change the venue. 

I am sorry the honorable member with the flourishing consti- 
tuency, the honorable member for Leeds, is not in his place, 
or else I would call upon him to describe this change of 
venue. The honorable member had alluded to the subject, and 
had said that Ireland indeed would have had a grievance had 



178 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

the Catholics of the south been subjected to a change of 
venue as the Americans were. But what did the ministers 
now intend ? Why, to send the Catholics of the south before 
what the honorable member for Leeds calls the prejudiced 
Orangemen of the north for trial. Oh ! I thank the honorable 
member for Leeds for his allusion to what was one of the 
great grievances of Massachusetts, a grievance which drove 
it not only to rebellion, but to revolution, for be it remembered, 
the struggle witTi the parent country was not always fatal to the 
resistant ? There are times when wrong is heaped upon wrong 
till at length the oppressed, out of its very weakness, becomes 
strong and achieves a victory which sanctifies acts that had 
otherwise been rebellion. But what was one of the grievances 
that drove the Americans to revolt ? Why, they complained 
that the American was taken from his own country and his 
own tribunals, to be tried in England. To take a Catholic 
from L'eland and to try him in England, before an English 
jury, would be, judging upon analogy, such an act as the 
Americans were justified in resisting, and as the high-tninded 
reformers of England would never sanction. This is one of 
the measures I accuse the government of intending to intro- 
duce, and I caU upon the reformers of England to say whether 
they will comply with and give their voice for the enforcement 
of so iniquitous a proceeding. 

The grievance the Americans complained of was nothing to 
that with which L^eland is threatened. The Americans were 
taken from their own country, it is true, but they were tried 
by juries and by the judges of the land. See the scheme that 
was proposed for Ireland. It was to be in the Lord Lieute- 
tenant to declare any district in a state of disturbance ; it was 
to be in the power of one man to outlaw Ireland or any part 
of it, and the part so outlawed was to be subject to mihtary 
tribunals. The law of the land was to become a dead letter 
at the dictum of a single man. Habeas Corpus was to be of no 
effect, and even the ears of parUament were to be closed 
against the appeal of the oppressed. The honorable member 
for Oldham, whose excellent sense had enabled him to mark 
out a safe and wholesome course of proceeding, has complained 
of the use of professional terms and phrases unintelligible to 



SPEECH ON THE IRISH COERCION BILL. 179 

the general listener. The complamt is just. Therefore in this 
case let them not hear any more about the suspension of 
Habeas Corpus, but rather let them hear that one man is to 
have the power of imprisoning whom he chooses in Ireland. 
Such is the fact. And a man being imprisoned, by whom is 
he to be tried ? By the judges of the land and juries ? No 
such thing. But by five military officers, who have each held 
a commission two years. Yes, there was another provision, 
the officers must be above twenty-one years of age. 

[On Mr. Shiel prompting Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Stanley rose to 
order.] 

Mr. O'Connell. — The right honorable gentleman had risen 
to call liim to order, and instead of doing so had forestalled 
him by a reply. Oh ! let Ireland at least be heard ; let her 
have fair play. If Ireland is to be gagged, let it not at least 
be without a hearing. 

The Speaker said he felt himself called upon to interrupt 
the honorable and learned member. Nothing could be clearer 
than that it was disorderly for any honorable member to go 
into the details of a measure not before the House, but before 
the other House of Parliament. He had before stated that 
to be the case, and he had done so the rather because when 
before called upon to maintain order, the honorable and 
learned member had not arrived at the point he now noticed 
as irregular, although there might be reason to apprehend he 
would do so. The honorable and learned member had now 
gone into that detail, and if it was not meant as having refer- 
ence to some measure before the other House of Parhament, 
but was to be taken as a mere supposition, he left to the hon- 
orable and learned member to say how much it would assist 
his argument. 

Mr. O'Connell. — I will obey the injunction of the chair. I 
speak upon supposition. I attribute to the government, 
whether right or wrong — if wrong I shall be contradicted — 
I attribute to the government, nay, to the noble lord (the 
Chancellor of the Exchequer) — for to avoid even the appear- 
ance of personahty, I will not mention the right honorable 
secretary (Mr. Stanley) — I attribute to the noble lord an 



180 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

intention to introduce as a minister to the Crown, a measure 
to enable five nulitarj officers to dispose of the Hberty, if not 
the lives of such of his Majesty's subjects in Ireland as the 
Lord Lieutenant chooses to send before them. Nay, a major- 
ity of five members are to have that power. I am not sur- 
prised at the sentiments of the right honorable secretary. It 
is but natural for the right honorable gentleman to shrink 
from any participation in so monstrous, so horrible a scene. 
Never was a plan more strongly marked with despotic boldness 
and tyrannical determination than this. But can it be ? Is 
it possible that his Majesty's government will dare to propose 
to a British House of Commons to give to three military offi- 
cers the power of destroying the hberty of the people of L'e- 
land ? Is that a plan for an EngHsh nobleman to originate, 
and for an Enghsh House of Commons to sanction ? But is 
that aU ? Oh, no ! 

The Americans complained of the venue being changed 
from America to England, but the Americans were tried by 
the judges of the land and by juries. Such is not to be the 
case with my countrymen. No, they are to be handed over 
to a military tribunal of three officers. And what is the char- 
acter of this tribunal ? I admu'e the British army. A braver 
never went into the field. I admire, too, the character of the 
officers in private fife. They are humane, enlightened, kindly. 
But what are the military tribunals to do ? How may they not 
be composed ? If three ensigns or three lieutenants formed a 
majority of one of them, would they venture to exercise their 
judgments in opposition to the wishes of government ? They 
dare not. If they did, they would be dismissed the service. 
The tribunal projected was open to every influence in the way 
of patronage and interest that could take from it the character 
of impartiahty or justice ; and it is to such a tribunal that the 
King's subjects in Ireland are to be delivered over, bound, 
fettered, and gagged. Nay, more, to such a tribunal is to be 
given the power of punishing men for not giving evidence. 
Oh, let honorable members call to mind the scenes under a 
similar but not so ati-ocious system. I remember one trial 
which occurred in 1798. Upon it a poor wretch named Grady 
was called as a witness, and the trial took place in Kerry. By- 



SPEECH ON THE lEISH COEKCION BILL. 181 

the-bj, it is a fact wortliy of notice, tliat in 1798 there was 
little or no disturbance in the great CathoHc counties. In 
Galway there was no disturbance, in Kerry but one, in Cork 
and in other Cathohc counties, all was peace. But with respect 
to Grady ; he was called before one of these tribunals to give 
evidence, and his answer not being satisfactory, he was ordered 
out and to receive one hundred lashes. He received them, and - 
was again brought before the tribunal. To the same question 
he made the same answer, and he was ordered to receive a 
second one hundred lashes. He did receive them, and was 
brought in a third time. The same question was repeated, 
and a third time he gave the same answer. He was ordered 
out to receive a third one hundred lashes, and while the pun- 
ishment was being inflicted, he fainted almost to death. He 
was not brought up again. Will the House forget that such 
scenes as that have occurred before a mihtary tribunal ? Are 
we, with such horrible facts on record, to have Court Martial 
in Ireland ? 

It wiU not be necessary before a Reformed Parliament, and 
in the nineteenth century, to do more than to point out such 
atrocities to bring on their universal execration. I charge the 
noble lord with this — intending to introduce a bill which is 
to be a selection of all the bitterest parts of all the severest 
acts ever passed for the coercion of Ireland. I would ask the 
noble lord this — Is it not a part of your plan to render the 
military tribunals irresponsible to the law ? I repeat — it is to 
the British Parliament in the nineteenth century I am calling 
attention to such monstrous matters. WiU this parliament 
desert Ireland ? Ireland has stood by England in the great 
fight for reform, and should not England now stand by Ireland 
when it implores and demands that every particle of the life 
and spirit of the constitution shall not be destroyed ? 

I will not now go further into details. It must be unneces- 
sary for me to do so. I have said enough to excite the inter- 
est of any lover of liberty who has heard me, or it is not in the 
power of language to do so. I demand for my country that 
the constitution shall not be suppressed — that the constitution 
shall not be frittered away by unknown private witnesses. 
Before Ireland is menaced with even the semblance of liberty, 



182 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

let lier at least be heard, let her meet her accusers face to face, 
and in the light of day. If Ireland is to be deprived of the 
constitution, and of her Uberties, at least let her be heard in 
her defence. According to the plan of the ministers, Ireland 
is to be dumb ; that great and important privilege, the right 
of petition, is to be suppressed. WiU England inflict upon 
Ireland so iniquitous a wrong ? 

[The honorable and leai-ned member, after thanking the House 
for the patience with which they had heard him, concluded by en- 
treating the House, by an expression in favor of an inquiry, before 
the exaction of measures of severity, to entitle themselves to the 
eternal gratitude of the Irish people.] 



SPEECH AT MULLAGHMAST MONSTER MEETING, 
SEPTEMBER, 1843. 



I ACCEPT, with the greatest alacrity, the high honor you have 
done me in caUing me to the chair of this majestic meeting. 
I feel more honored than I ever did in my hfe, with one sin- 
gle exception, and that related to, if possible, an equally ma- 
jestic meeting at Tara. But I must say that if a comparison 
were instituted between them, it would take a more discriminat- 
ing eye than mine to discover any difference between them. 
There are the same incalculable numbers — there is the same 
firmness — there is the same determination — there is the same 
exhibition of love to old Ireland — there is the same resolution 
not to violate the peace — ^not to be guilty of the shghtest out- 
rage — not to give the enemy power by committing a crime, 
but peacefully and manfully to stand together in the open day 
— to protest before man, and in the presence of God, against 
the iniquity of continuing the Union. 

, «At Tara, I protested against the Union — I repeat the protest 
Mullaghmastfc I declare solemnly my thorough conviction, 
as a constitutional lawyer, that tlie Union is totally void in 
point of principle and of constitutional force. I teU you that 
no portion of the empire had the power to traffic on the rights 



SPEECH AT MULLAGHMAST. 183 

and liberties of tlie Irish people* The Irish people nominated 
them to make laws, and not legislatures. They were ap- 
pointed to act under the constitution and not annihilate it. 
Their delegation from the people was confined within the hmits 
of the constitution, and the moment the Irish parhament went 
beyond those limits and destroyed the constitution, that mo- 
ment it annihilated its own power, but could not annihilate 
the immortal spirit of hberty, which belongs, as a rightful in- 
heritance, to the people of Ireland. Take it then from me 
that the Union is void. I admit there is the force of a law, 
because it has been supported by the pohceman's truncheon 
— by the soldier's bayonet — and by the horseman's sword ; be- 
cause it is supported by the courts of law and those who have 
power to adjudicate in them ; but I say solemnly, it is not sup- 
ported by constitutional right. The Union, therefore, in my 
thorough conviction, is totally void, and I avail myself of this 
opportunity to announce to several hundred of thousands of my 
fellow-subjects, that the Union is an unconstitutional law, and 
that it is not fated to last long — its hour is approaching. 
America offered us her sympathy and support. We refused 
the support but we accepted the sympathy ; and while we ac- 
cepted the sympathy of the Americans we stood upon the firm 
ground of the right of every human being to hberty ; and I, in 
the name of the Irish nation, declare that no support ob- 
tained from America should be pm^chased by the price of 
abandoning principle for one moment, and thart principle is, 
that every human being is entitled to freedom. 

My friends, I want nothing for the Irish but their country, 
and I think the Irish are competent to obtain their own coun- 
try for themselves*: I like to have the sympathy of every good- 
man everywhere, but I want not armed support or physical 
strength from any country. The Repubhcan party in France 
offered me assistance^^ I thanked them for their sympathy,'' 
but I distinctly refused to accept any support from them. I 
want support from neither France nor America, and if that 
usurper, Louis Phihppe, who trampled on the liberties of his 
own gallant nation, thought fit to assail me in his newspaper, 
I returned the taunt with double vigor, and I denounce him to 
Europe and the world as a treacherous tyrant, who has violated 



184 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

the compact with, his own country, and therefore is not fit to 
assist the Hberties of any other country. I want not the sup- 
port of France; I want not the support of America; I have 
physical support enough about me to acliieve any change ; 
but you know well that it is not my i^lan — I will not risk the 
safety of one of you. I could not afford the loss of one of 
you — I will protect you all, and it is better for you all to be 
merry and alive, to enjoy the repeal of the Union ; but there 
is not a man of you there that would not, if we were attacked 
unjustly and illegally, be ready to stand in the open field by 
my side. Let every man that concurs in that sentiment lift 
up his hand. 

[Every individual in the immense multitude lifted his hand 
amidst tremendous cheering.] 

The assertion of that sentiment is our sure protection, for 
no person will attack us, and we will attack nobody. Indeed, 
it would be the height of absurdity for us to think of making 
any attack ; for there is not one man in his senses in Europe 
or America, that does not admit that the repeal of the Union 
is now inevitable. The English papers taunted us, and their 
writers laughed us to scorn ; but now they admit that it is im- 
possible to resist the application for repeal. More power to 
you. But that even shows we have power enough to know 
how to use it. Why, it is only this week that one of the lead- 
ing London newspapers, called the Morning Herald, who had 
a reporter at the Lismore meeting, published an account of 
that great and mighty meeting, and in that account the writer 
expressly says that it will be impossible to refuse so peacea- 
ble, so determined, so unanimous a people, -as the people of 
Leland, the restoration of their domestic legislature. For my 
own part, I would have thought it wholly unnecessary to call 
together so large a meeting as this, but for the trick played by 
"Wellington, and Peel, and Graham, and Stanley, and the rest 
of the paltry administration, by whose government this coun- 
try is disgraced. I don't suppose so worthless an administra- 
tion ever before got together. Lord Stanley is a renegade from 
Whiggism, and Sir James Graham is worse. Sir Eobert Peel 
has five hundred colors on his bad standard, and not one of 
them is permanent. To-day it is orange, to-morrow it wiU 



SPEECH AT MULLAGHMAST. 185 

be green, tlie day after neither one nor tlie otlier, but we sliall 
take care that it shall never be dyed in blood. 

Then there is the poor old Duke of "WeUiugton, and nothing 
was ever so absurd as their deification of him in England. 
The English historian — rather the Scotch one — Alison, an ar- 
rant Tory, admits that the Duke of Wellington was surprised 
at Waterloo, and if he got victoriously out of that battle, it 
was owing to the valor of the British troops, and thek uncon- 
querable determination to die, but not to yield. No man was 
ever a good soldier, but the man who goes into the battle de- 
termined to conquer or not come back from the battle-field. 
No other principle makes a good soldier — conquer or die is 
the battle cry for the good soldier ; conquer or die is his only 
security. The Duke of Wellington had troops at Waterloo 
that had learned that word, and there were Irish troops 
amongst them. You aU. remember the verses made by the 
poor Shan Yan Yocht : 

"At famed Waterloo, 
Duke Wellington would look blue 
If Paddy was not there too, 
Says the Shan Yan Vocht." 

Yes, the glory he got there was bought by the blood of the 
Enghsh, Irish, and Scotch soldiers — the glory was yom-s. He 
is nominally a member of the administration, but yet they 
would not entrust him with any kind of ofiice. He has no 
duty at all to perform, but a sort of Irish anti-repeal warden. 
I thought I nesver would be obliged to the ministry, but I am 
obliged to them. They put a speech abusing the Irish into 
the Queen's mouth. They accused us of disaffection, but 
they lie — it is their speech — there is no disaffection in Ireland. 
We were loyal to the sovereigns of Great Britain, even when 
they were our enemies — we were loj'^al to George the Third, 
even when he betrayed us — we were loyal to George .the 
Fourth, when he blubbered and cried when we forced him to 
emancipate us. We were loyal to old Billy, though his min- 
ister put into his mouth a base, bloody, and intolerant speech 
against Ireland ; and we are loyal to the Queen, no matter 
what our enemies may say to the contrary. It is not the 



186 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

Queen's sjDeecli, and I pronounce it to be a lie. There is no 
dissatisfaction in Ireland, but there is this — a full determina- 
tion to obtain justice and liberty. I am much obhged to the 
ministry for that speech, for it gives me, amongst other things, 
an opportunity of addressing such meetings as this. I had 
held the monster meetings. I had fully demonstrated the 
opinion of Ireland. I was convinced their unanimous de- 
termination to obtaia hberty was sufficiently signified by 
the many meetings already held ; but when the mimister's 
speech came out, it was necessary to do something more. 
Accordingly, I called a monster meeting in Loughrea. I 
called another meeting in Chfden. I had another monster 
meeting in Lismore, and here now we are assembled on the 
Kath of MuUaghmast. 

At MuUaghmast (and I have chosen this for this obvious 
reason), we are on the precise spot where English treachery — 
aye, and false Irish treachery, too — consummated a massacre 
that has never been imitated, save in the massacre of the 
Mamelukes by Mahomet Ali. It was necessary to have Turks 
atrocious enough to commit a crime equal to that perpetrated 
by Enghshmen. But do not think that the massacre at Mul- 
laghmast was a question between Protestants and Catholics — 
it was no such thing. The murdered persons were to be sure 
CathoHcs, but a great number of the murderers were also 
Cathohcs, and Irishmen, because there were then, as well as 
now, many Cathohcs who were traitors to Ireland. But we 
have now this advantage, that we have many honest Protest- 
ants joining us — ^joining us heartily in hand and heart, for old 
Ireland and liberty. I thought this a fit and becoming spot 
to celebrate, in the open day, our unanimity in declaring our 
determination not to be misled by any treachery. Oh, my 
friends, I wiU keep you clear of aU treachery — there shaU be 
no bargain, no compromise with England — we shall take 
nothing but repeal, and a parhament in College Green. You 
wiU never, by my advice, confide in any false hopes they hold 
out to you ; never confide in anything coming from them, or 
cease from your struggle, no matter what promise may be 
held out to you, until you hear me say I am satisfied ; and I 
will teU you where I will say that — near the statue of King 



SPEECH AT MULLAGHMAST. 187 

William, in College Green. No, we came here to express our 
determination to die to a man, if necessary, in the cause of old 
Ireland. "We came to take advice of each other, and above 
aU,. I beheve you came here to take my advice. I can tell 
you, I have the game in my hand — I have the triumph secure 
— I have the repeal certain, if you but obey my advice. 

[Great cheers, and cries of *' We will obey you in any- 
thing."] 

I win go slow — you must allow me to do so — ^but you will go 
sure. No man shall find himself imprisoned or persecuted 
who follows my advice. I have led you thus far in safety ; 
I have swelled the multitude of repealers until they are identi- 
fied with the entire population, or nearly the entire population 
of the land, for seven eighths of the Irish people are now en- 
rolling themselves repealers. [Cheers and cries of more power 
to you.] I don't want more power ; I have power enough, and 
all I ask of you is to allow me to use it. I will go on quietly 
and slowly, but I will go on firmly, and with a certainty of 
success. I am now arranging a plan for the formation of the 
Irish House of Commons«» 

It is a theory, but it is a theory that may be realized in 
three weeks. The repeal arbitrators are beginning to act — 
the people are submitting their differences to men chosen by 
themselves. You will see by the newspapers that Dr. Gray, 
and my son, and other gentlemen, have already held a petty 
session of their own, where justice will be administered free 
of all expense to the people. The people shall have chosen 
magistrates of their own in the room of the magistrates who 
have been removed. The people shall submit their differences 
to them, and shall have strict justice administered to them, 
that shall not cost them a single farthing. I shall go on with 
that plan until we have all disputes settled and decided by 
justices appointed by the people themselves. [Long may you 
live.] I wish to live long enough to have perfect justice ad- 
ministered to Ireland, and Hberty proclaimed throughout the 
land. It wUl take me some time to prepare my plan for the 
formation of the new Irish House of Commons — that plan 
which we will yet submit to her Majesty for her approval, 
when she gets rid of her present paltry administration and 



188 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

has one tlint I can support. But I must finish that job be- 
fore I go forth, and one of my reasons for calhng you together 
is to state my intentions to you. Before I arrange my plan 
the Conciliation Hall tvlU be finished, and it will be worth any 
man's whUe to go from MuUaghmast to Dublin to see it. 

When we have it arranged I will call together three hundred, 
as the Times caUed them, bogtrotters, but better men never 
stepped on pavement. But I will have the tliree hundred and 
no thanks to them. Wales is up at present, almost in a state 
of insurrection. The people there have found that the land- 
lords' power is too great, and has been used t}T:anically, and I 
believe you agree with them tolerably well in that. They in- 
sist on the sacredness of the right of the tenants to security of 
possession, and with the equity of tenure which I would es- 
tabhsh, we will do the landlords full justice, but we will do 
the people justice also. We will recollect that the land is the 
landlord's, and let him have the benefit of it, but we will also 
recollect that the labor belongs to the tenant, and the tenant 
must have the value of his labor, not transitory and by the 
day, but permanently and by the year. Tes, my friends, for 
this purpose I must get some time. I worked the present re- 
peal year tolerably well. I beheve no one in January last, 
would beheve that we could have such a meeting within the 
year as the Tara demonstration. You may be sm"e of this — 
and I say it in the presence of him who will judge me — that 
I never will willfully deceive you. I have but one wish under 
heaven, and that is for the hberty and prosperity of Ireland. 
I am for leaving England to the Enghsh, Scotland to the 
Scotch, but we must have Ireland for the Irish. I will not be 
content until I see not a single man in any office, fi'om the 
lowest constable to the Lord Chancellor, but Irishmen. This is 
our land, and we must have it. We will be obedient to the 
Queen, joined to England by the golden link of the Crown, 
but we must have our own parhament, our own bench, our 
own magistrates, and we will give some of the shoneens whc 
now occupy the bench leave to retire, such as those lately ap- 
pointed by Sugden. He is a pretty boy, sent here from Eng- 
land ; but I ask, did you ever hear such a name as he has got ? 
I remember, in Wexford, a man told me he had a pig at home 



SPEECH AT MULLAGHMAST. 189 

wliicli lie was so fond of that he would call it Sugden. No ; 
w^e shall get judicial independence for Ireland. It is for this 
purpose we are assembled here to-day, as every countenance 
I see around me testifies. If there is any one here who is for 
the Union, let him say so. Is there anybody here for the 
repeal. [Cries of " all, all," and loud cheering.] 

Yes, my friends, the Union was begot in iniquity — it was 
perpetrated in fraud and cruelty. It was no compact, no bar- 
gain, but it w^as an act of the most decided tyranny and cor- 
ruption that was ever yet perpetrated. Trial by jury was sus- 
pended — the right of personal protection was at an end — 
courts martial sat throughout the land — and the county of 
Kildare, among others, flowed with blood. Oh, my friends, 
listen now to the man of peace, who will never expose you to 
the power of your enemies. In 1798 there were some brave 
men, some valiant men, to head the people at large, but there 
were many traitors, who left the people in the power of their 
enemies. The Curragh of Kildare afforded an instance of 
the fate which Irishmen were to expect, who confided in their 
Saxon enemies. Oh, it was an ill-organized, a premature, a 
foohsh, and an absurd insurrection ; but you have a leader now 
who never will allow you to commit any act so foolish or so 
destructive. How dehghted do I feel with the thorough con- 
viction which has come over the minds of the people, that they 
could not gratify your enemies more than by committing a 
crime. No ; our ancestors suffered for confiding in the Eng- 
lish, but we never will confide in them. They suffered for 
being divided amongst themselves. There is no division 
amongst us. They suffered for their own dissensions — for 
not standing man to man by each other's side. We shall 
stand peaceably side by side in the face of every enemy. Oh, 
how delighted was I in the scenes which I witnessed as I 
came along here to-day ! How my heart throbbed, how my 
spirit was elevated, how my bosom swelled with delight at the 
multitude which I beheld, and which I shall behold, of the 
stalwart and strong men of Kildare ! I was delighted at the 
activity and force that I saw around me, and my old heart 
grew warm again in admiring the beauty of the dark-eyed 
maids and matrons of Kildare. Oh, there is a starlight spark- 



190 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

ling from the eye of a Kildare beauty, that is scarcely equalled, 
and could not be excelled aU over the world. And remember 
that you are the sons, the fathers, the brothers, and the hus- 
bands of such women, and a traitor or a coward could never 
be connected with any of them. Yes, I am in a county, re- 
markable in the history of Ireland for its bravery and its mis- 
fortune, for its creduhty in the faith of others, for its people 
judged of the Saxon by the honesty and honor of their own 
natures. I am in a county celebrated for the sacredness of 
its shrines and fanes. I am in a county where the lamp of 
Kildare's holy shrine burned with its sacred fire, through ages 
of darkness and storm — that fire which for six centuries burned 
before the high altar without being extinguished, being fed 
continuously, without the slightest interruption, and it seemed 
to me to have been not an inapt representation of the continu- 
ous fidehty and rehgious love of country of the men of Kil- 
dare. Yes, you have those high qualities — ^religious fidelity, 
continuous love of country. Even your enemies admit that 
the world has never produced any people that exceeded the 
Irish in activity and strength. The Scottish philosopher has 
declared, and the French philosopher has confirmed it, that 
number one in the human race is, blessed be Heaven, the 
Irishman. In moral virtue, in rehgion, in perseverance, and 
in glorious temperance, you excel. Have I any teetotallers 
here ? Yes, it is teetotahsm that is repealing the Union. I 
could not afford to bring you together, I would not dare to 
bring you together, but that I had the teetotallers for my 
police. 

Yes, among the nations of the earth, Irela.nd stands number 
one in the physical strength of her sons, and in the beauty 
and purity of her daughters. Ireland, land of mj forefathers, 
how my mind expands, and my spuit walks abroad in some- 
thing of majesty, when I contemplate the high quaHties, ines- 
timable virtues, the true purity and piety, and religious fidelity 
of the inhabitants of your green fields and productive moun- 
tains. Oh, wliat a scene surrounds us ! — It is not only the 
countless thousands of brave and active and peaceable and 
rehgious men that are here assembled, but natui'e herself has 
written her character with the finest beauty in the verdant 



SPEECH AT MULLAGHMAST. 191 

plains that surround us. Let any man run round the horizon 
with his eye, and tell me if created nature ever produced any- 
thing so green and so lovely, so undulating, so teeming with 
production. The richest harvests that any land can produce 
are those reaped in Ireland ; and then here are the sweetest 
meadows, the greenest fields, the loftiest mountains, the purest 
streams, the noblest rivers, the most capacious harbors — and 
her water power is equal to turn the machinery of the whole 
world. Oh, my friends, it is a country worth fighting for — it 
is a country worth dying for ; but above all, it is a country 
worth being tranquil, determined, submissive and docile ; for 
disciplined as you are in obedience to those who are breaking 
the way, and tramphng down the barriers between you and 
your constitutional hberty, I will see every man of you hav- 
ing a vote, and every man protected by the baUot from the 
agent or landlord. I will see labor protected, and every title 
to possession recognized, when you are industrious and hon- 
est. I will see prosperity again throughout your land — ^the 
busy hum of the shuttle and the tinkling of the smithy shall 
be heard again. We shall see the nailer employed even until 
the middle of the night, and the carpenter covering himself with 
his chips. I wUl see prosperity in all its gradations spreading 
through a happy, contented, rehgious land. I will hear the 
hymn of a happy people go forth at sunrise to God in praise 
of his mercies — and I will see the evening sun set down 
amongst the uphfted hands of a rehgious and free population. 
Every blessing that man can bestow and religion can confer 
upon the faithful heart, shall spread throughout the land. 
Stand by me — join with me — I will say be obedient to me, 
and Ireland shall be free. 



192 " SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 



MR. O'CONNELL'S SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE, 

At the Irish State Trials, 1844, in the Court of Queen'' s Bench, 
in Ireland, in the case of the Queen vs. Daniel O'Connell and 
others. 



Gentlemen, I beg your patient attention, while I sliow you, 
in as few sentences as I possibly can, and in my own plain and 
prosiac style, the right I have to demand from you a favorable 
verdict. I ask it without disrespect and without flattery — I 
ask it on the ground of common sense and common justice — 
upon these grounds I demand your favorable verdict, being 
thoroughly convinced that I am plainly entitled to it. I do 
not feel that I should have been warranted in addressing you 
at all, after the many speeches you have aheady heard, and 
that powerful display of talent that so delighted, as well as I 
trust instructed you ; but I do not stand here my own cUent. 
I have clients of infinitely more importance. My clients, in 
this case, are the Irish people — my client is Ireland — and I 
stand here the advocate of the rights, and hberties, and con- 
stitutional privileges of that people. My only anxiety is lest 
their sacred cause — their right to independent legislation — 
should be in the slightest degree tarnished or impeded by 
anything in which I have been the instrument. I am con- 
scious of the integrity of my purpose — I am conscious of the 
purity of my motives — I am conscious of the inestimable value 
of the object I had in view — the Repeal of the Union. I 
own to you I cannot endure the Union ; it was founded upon 
the grossest injustice — it was based upon the grossest insult — 
the intolerance of Irish prosperity. This was the motive that 
actuated the malefactors who perpetrated that iniquity ; and 
I have the highest authority — the ornament for many 3'ears 
of that bench, but now and recentlj'- in his honorable grave — 
that the motive of this proceeding was an intolerance of Irish 
prosperity. Nor shall I leave that on his word alone. I 
have other authorities for it, with which I shall trouble you 
in the course of as brief, for I am exceedingly anxious to make 
as brief an address as I possibly can. I am not here to deny 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 193 

anything I Lave done, or here to paUiate anything that I have 
done. I am ready to reassert in court all I have said, not 
taking upon myself the clumsy mistakes of reporters — not 
abiding by the fallibility that necessarily attends the report- 
ing of speeches, and, in particular, where those speeches are 
squeezed up together, as it were, for the purposes of the news- 
papers. I do not hesitate to say that there are many severe 
and harsh things of individuals, and clumsy jokes, that I would 
rather not have said, but the substance of what I have said I 
avow, and I am here respectfully to vindicate it ; and as to all 
my actions, I am ready, not only to avow them, but to justify 
them. For the entire of what I have done and said was done 
and said in the performance of, to me, a sacred duty — the en- 
deavoring to procure the restoration of the Irish parliament. 
If I had no other objection to it I would find one in the period 
in which it was carried — it was a revolutionary period. The 
nations of Europe were overwhelmed by a military power, in- 
spired as it was by the infidel philosophy of France. At that 
period, almost every country in Europe was torn from its legiti- 
mate sovereignty — people were crushed — princes were banished 
— kingdoms and states were altered — it was a revolutionary 
period ; but alas ! a day of retribution anar restoration has 
come for every other country but this. What has since hap- 
pened has fortunately restored the natural, or, at least, the 
political order of tilings in other countries — every country has 
its day of retribution and restoration, save only Ireland. Ire- 
land alone remains under the influence of the fatal revolution 
of that period, and you are assembled in that bos to prevent 
justice being done to Ireland, as it has been to other coun- 
tries. 

This is not the time to discuss how you were put into that 
box — nor is this the place to get any remedy on that subject. 
I do not assert the Attorney-General had anything to do with 
that matter but what the law allowed him to do, and over 
which the court had no control. If wrong had been done, the 
remedy lay elsewhere ; when, if right was violated, it will be 
redressed — but here I am put to address you, without either 
discourtesy or flattery, as to the species of tribunal I am about 
to offer my arguments. It is quite certain there is considera- 



194 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. ' 

ble discrepancy of opinion between you and me ; tliere can be 
no doubt of that — there is a discrepancy on one subject, and 
one of the utmost importance — we differ as to the Repeal of 
the Union. If you had not so differed, you would not be in that 
very box. You also differ with me on another most important 
subject — and that is on the subject of our rehgious belief. If you 
had been of the same faith as I, "not one of you would be in 
that box ; and these differences are perhaps aggravated by the 
fact, that I am not only a Cathohc, but one who was most suc- 
cessful — and I can say it without boasting, for it is a part of 
history — in putting down that Protestant ascendency of which, 
perhaps, you are the champions — certainly you were not the 
antagonists, and in estabhshing that religious equality against 
which some of you contended, and against which all of your 
opinions were formed. This is a disadvantage which does not 
terrify me from the performance of my duty. I care not what 
may be the effect as regards myself — ^I care not what punish- 
ment it may bring down — I glory in what I have done — I 
boast of what I did. I am ready to defend all I have suc- 
ceeded in accomphshing. I know I am, gentlemen of the jury, 
in your power, but I know I am in the power of jurors of 
honesty and integrity, and I appeal to you as such. There 
are points on wliich we essentially differ. The first is the 
Repeal of the Union — and you are all aware of my former 
conduct respecting Cathohc Emancipation. But you are there 
to administer justice — you are there to do what is right be- 
tween all parties ; and while I remark these things, it is not 
because I despah- of your doing me justice. I would, how- 
ever, prefer not being harassed with the thought that by any 
possibility, either by the infirmity of human nature, or from 
any cause, other ingredients should enter in. 

Gentlemen, I now have done with you. I pass on to the 
consideration of the case itself. I come to the prosecution. 
It is a curious prosecution — it is a strange prosecution — it is 
the strangest prosecution that was ever instituted. It is not 
one fact, or two facts, or three facts. No ; while that for 
which our criminal law is most lauded is the simplicity with 
which a particular fact is tried, so that the jury may be dis- 
embarrassed from everything else — ^here it is the history of 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 195 

nine months you are to go throngli — here you have a mon- 
strous accumulation of matter flung before you ; and I defy 
the most briUiant understanding that ever ornamented a court 
or jury to disengage what may be of importance from that 
which may induce an unfavorable result, but which ought not, 
legally, to do so. The great difficulty is, to bring such a quan- 
tity of matter before you. In doing so your memory fails ; 
and it is worse than a failure, as it is apt to recollect what 
may be but strong and strildng, while it may forget that which 
should make an important consideration — those parts which 
are explanatory and mitigatory. 

I arraign this prosecution, not in the spirit of hostility or 
anger, but on constitutional principles — the impossibility of 
any jury so disengaging that mighty mass of matter now be- 
fore it as to find out what was really the question to deter- 
mine. Let me now see whether I can help you in that, I 
will endeavor to see how much of the affirmative there is in 
this prosecution, and how much there is of negative qual- 
ity in it — that is, what it is, and what it is not. The entire 
strength of this prosecution consists in that cabalistic word, 
" conspiracy." If I look to any dictionary for its import, or 
if I ask common sense, I find it means a secret agreement 
among several persons to commit a crime. That is the com- 
mon sense view of it, as well as its dictionary meaning — a pri- 
vate agreement among several persons to commit a crime ; but 
this word, in recent times, has been taken under the special 
protection of the bar. They have not only considered it an of- 
fence to conspire to commit a crime, but they have put two 
hooks into a fine — so to divide the subject as both committal 
of crime that they speU out conspiracy in such a way as to 
attain that end. I do not think there is much of justice in 
the second branch, if at all brought into consideration, unless 
it was so clear and so distinct as to substantiate the offence. 

We will now take this conspiracy ; let us see whether there 
are any negative qualities in it as to the evidence produced by 
the Crown. It is admitted by the Crown itself in this case, 
that there was no privacy — no secrecy — no definite agreement 
whatever to bring it about — but, above all, there was no pri- 
vate agreement, no secret society, nothing concealed, nothing 



196 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

even privately communicated — tliere was no private informa- 
tion ; nay, not one private conversation — every tiling was 
open, avowed, proclaimed, published. A secret conspiracy : 
whicli there was no secrecy about ! — all lay openly pro- 
claimed, and openly published — whether in the Dublin Even- 
ing Mail, or Dublin Evening Post, for all has been raked out 
of that secret abyss of all secret channels of communication, 
the public newspapers. Eeally, it is quite too harsh a thing 
for one to be called on to defend himself against a conspiracy 
so perpetrated, committed in open day, and committed by 
public announcement, with the ringing of bells, to know who 
would come as witnesses to the conspiracy. To be a cons]3iracy 
there must be an agreement ; but whether private or not, that 
is another question, but I insist on it there ought to be some- 
thing to conceal, and will admit that it should not be in the 
presence of the legal authorities, nor in the presence of her 
Majesty's Attorney-General, the Sohcitor-General, or any of 
the learned sergeants. Really, see what a monstrous thing 
it is to call that a conspiracy which everybody in the world 
might know, and which all might witness. Some persons had 
formed the arrangements ; it was occasionally attended by 
Mr. Such-a-one one day, and by Mr. Such-a-one another day ; 
on the thu'd day Mr. Barrett was there ; Mr. Duffy once or 
twice, thus spelling out the affair in that way. In common 
sense, could it be endured that such should be denominated a 
conspiracy. A conspu-acy ! Where was this agreement made 
— when made — how was it made ? Was it made in winter or 
summer — in spring or autumn ? When was it attended — on a 
Sunday or a week day ? Can you tell me the hour of the day, 
or the month, or the day of the month ? Can you tell me any 
one of the three quarters of the nine months ? Who was by, 
who spoke, who made the arrangements, who moved and sec- 
onded the resolutions ? 

Gentlemen of the jury, I appeal to your common sense — to 
your reason. Place yourselves for one moment in my position, 
and you were addressing a Catholic jury ; look for one mo- 
ment and see — how ? — with what ?— I will not say with indig- 
nation — but ^ith what higher feelings of conscious integrity 
you would laugh with scorn the daring to find you guilty of a 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF HIMSELF. 197 

conspiracy, under sucli circumstances. You liave not in this 
case the shghtest shadow of a concoction ; you have not one 
particle of that which should belong to a charge of this sort. 
I do not even know, from this proceeding, whether I was pre- 
sent at this conspiracy or agreement, either public or private. 
Ought I not, then, to have the advantage of an alibi ? If you 
were to run over the nine months of this conspiracy, it would 
be a kind of toss-up to know whether I was there or some- 
body else — to know who was there — and to find out whether 
this agreement was in writing, or whether it was a mere parole 
agreement. And I want also to know has any one told you ? 
If there were an action in the Nisi Prius Court, and you were 
the jury in the box, and that the question was one of plain 
contract, is there any possibility of your not finding a verdict 
on a contract which was given in evidence ? But here there 
is nothing of the sort. I remember it being once said to a 
judge by a lawyer — " O, my lord, it would not be evidence on 
a ten pound promissory note, but it might be evidence in a 
criminal case." Your lordship might have heard that such a 
thing was once said, but I will only say to you that it would 
not be evidence, as to the £10 contract ; they should get the 
definition — if right, I should be in the bill of particulars. 
Such a definition — an agency and conspiracy — and not be at 
last in the bill particulars. I do not mean to profit by the 
circumstance, but I say it is not in the biU of particulars ; 
and therefore if they had attempted to give it in writing, 
without giving it in the bill of particulars, they would un- 
doubtedly have shut out from the beginning all evidence. 
Shall they escape your honest view on such a subject as that 
of consciences, and if there had been a conspiracy it would be 
proved, and that the only reason why it is not in all its de- 
tails, and all its circumstances is because it did not exist. 
What are they to do ? The Attorney-General, forsooth, leaves 
it to you ; the agreement ought to be in reality ; it is an im- 
aginary one, and you are to vote that the imagination is a 
reality, and find me guilty because you imagine. 

I do not wish to speak disparagingly of the Attorney-Gene- 
ral — no man is less inclined to do so than I am — on the con- 
trary, my lords, I admit the ingenuity with which he stated 



198 SELECT SrEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

tlio case, I admit tlie talent he displayed, the industry he 
evinced throughout. He was eleven hours at it, eleven mortal 
hours. "When did he tell you of the conspiracy ? " Oh !" said 
he, " wait awhile, wait till I come to the close, and when I do 
come to the end, go back to the beginning, and find out the 
conspiracy ;" and allow me to say, that if any gentleman could 
have found out the conspiracy, it would have been the Attor- 
ney-General. Yes, he did take eleven hours in throwing out 
that garbage to the jury. " There," said he, " is the Pilot, the 
Nation. Here are speeches and publications — now find out 
the conspiracy. The case is good enough for you to make out 
the conspiracy." I remember a case on the Munster circuit 
in which the celebrated Mr. Egan was engaged for the 
defendant. It was stated by Mr. Hoare, a gentleman of dark 
appearance, who made a very powerful speech on the merits 
of the case. Mr. Egan said — " Oh, I will make such another — 
I will." At once — " Gentlemen of the jury," he commenced. 
Now, he was sure of his jury, and all he wanted was an excuse 
for them. " Gentlemen of the jury," said he, " surely you wiU 
not be led away by the dark oblivion of a brow." One of the 
counsel who sat near him said, " Why, Egan, that is non- 
sense." " To be sure it is," was the reply, " but it will do for 
the jury." So the eleven hours are good enough for you. Oh ! 
it is nonsense — it is criminal nonsense — to call that conspiracy 
which takes eleven hours in the development. Hardy was 
tried for constructive high treason. At the anniversary which 
always took place in celebration of the integrity of the jury, 
one who had been a juryman in the case was in the habit of 
attending ; when his health was drunk he always made the 
same speech, to the efiect that he was not accustomed to public 
speaking, and in the course of such speech he would say — 
" Mr. Chairman, I will tell you why I acquitted Mr. Hardy. 
The counsel was eleven hours stating the case ; there were 
eight or nine days occupied in giving evidence. Now I know 
that no man could be guilty of treason when the case could 
take so many words and such a length of time to prove, so I 
made up my mind to acquit." 

Now what necessity could there be for the Attorney-Gene- 
ral to ransack newspapers to make out a case of conspiracy 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF HIMSELF. 199 

against the Crown ? If tlie case were a good one, depend on 
it the Attorney-General has talent enough to tell you all in 
one hour and a half at the utmost. Give me leave to say — 
and by What I am about to state I mean to signify no disre- 
spect to the counsel for the Crown — I consider myself, although 
I am not here with my wig and gown, a barrister still, and I 
have a fellow-feeling for the profession ; but give me leave to 
say that the Attorney-General unquestionably would, could he 
have done so, have shown you the when, the how, the manner, 
he would have pointed out all the particulars. But what has 
he shown you ? Nothing ; and he leaves the case in your 
hands, thinking that it is quite good enough for you. There 
is no privacy or secrecy even imputed. You have nothing to 
conjecture — there is nothing supposed to have happened in 
private — nothing at all. The entire is before you, and, there- 
fore as you know all, I say that there never was a case in 
which the Attorney-General so signally failed as in the 
present. 

You may remember when this trial was about to commence ; 
the whole country was full of rumors. It was said that some- 
thing dark and atrocious would come out — that there was a 
clue to everything. Why, my lords, I do solemnly assure you 
that no less than seven gentlemen have been pointed out to 
me after this mode — "There is Mr. So-and-so, one who was 
seen with Mr. Kemmis's officer." " That man was at the Cas- 
tle." " That man is a barrister, whose office is not far distant 
from yours in Merrion Square." " Don't," it was said, " asso- 
ciate with Mr. So-and-so ; keep him at arm's length ; he is 
treacherous ; he is betraying." I repeat it, that no less than 
seven persons have suffered in their characters exceedingly 
by the allegation that they were in fault ; the answer was — 
" They have nothing to betray — much good may it do them ; 
they will invent." Now, it is an acknowledged fact, that 
informers, who have nothing to tell, invent. Now I ask, after 
all the rumors which havo been afloat, did you not every one 
of you expect, when you came here, to learn something — did 
you not expect to have some plot discovered — to hear of some 
secret organization — to hear some private conversation regard- 
ing these traversers given in evidence, influencing and alteiing 



200 SELECT SPEECHES OP DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

the nature of tlieir public acts? If you were so fortunate as 
not to expect this, you certainly have not been disappointed ; 
but if you entertained the expectation, was ever disappoint- 
ment so complete and unmitigated? Go where you please, 
and you will hear it said, " Oh ! is that all the Attorney-Gene- 
ral has done ? has he nothing more to say ? We knew all 
that before !" A conspiracy ! this is a conspiracy ! Aye, gen- 
tlemen, what has become of the dark designs, the stratagems, 
the foul conspiracy, the government chimeras dire of the 
imagination? "What has become of them? They are van- 
ished. There is nothing new, nothing disclosed — there is 
nothing to be concealed. It would have been the duty, I 
don't deny it, it Avould have been the duty of the government 
to prove conspiracy if such a thing existed. Gentlemen of the 
jury, they had inclination to prove, but they could not. You 
perceive with what interest they forward every part of this 
case, but above aU, the strong and striking interest they have 
in discovering evidence of real facts, of existing facts — with 
what interest they hunt out the conspirators, and follow them 
to their caves and recesses. Every power, all that influence, 
and wealth, and authority could do, has been exerted. The 
expectation of promotion has been ventured — promotion in the 
constabulary : every temptation held out, but all in vain — for 
one very plain and simple reason — there was nothing to be- 
tray, and you know that. Well, then, what is the evidence ? 
If there was nothing new, let us see what the old evidence is. 
" The hfe," they say, " of an old coat is a new button." What 
does the evidence consist of ? Ehst, meetings ; next, newspa- 
pers. They spell out an undefined conspiracy — that conspi- 
racy existing in the imagination — a conspiracy without posi- 
tion or time ; and to prove that conspiracy, they produce ac- 
counts of meetings and volumes of newspapers. 

We will consider each of these consecutively. Pirst of all, 
you allow me to make this observation, as there is nothing se- 
cret. I ask you what coald tempt me, an old lawyer, to enter 
publicly into a conspiracy ? I boasted that I kept the public 
free from the meshes of the law — I say that I boasted of 
this. You have heard the statement read at least twenty 
times. I boasted- of preventing men from violating the law 



SPEECH IN DEFENCE OF HIMSELF. 201 

Now, do any of you believe that, after this, I could euter into 
a public conspiracy ? You might say, if there was something 
private — something secret, you might then say, " the old law- 
yer thought he would be secure of his co-conspirators ;" but 
there is nothing secret. Under all all these circumstances you 
may, perhaps, have a more terrible opinion of me than those 
who I will venture to say know me better. You know me 
principally through the medium of the calumnies and abuse 
heaped upon me by those parties against whom I am op- 
posed, but there is not one of you can consider me such a 
blockhead, such an idiot, as that I should publicly conspire to 
ruin the cause which is nearest to my heart — to ruin a cause 
which has been the darling object of my ambition — that I 
should ruin the prospect of that for which I refused to go on 
the bench, and the offer of being the Master of the Rolls. 
It is a question whether I did not refuse the Chief Baronship 
before ever it was offered — but there is no question that I did 
refuse the offer of the Mastership of the Rolls. 

Gentlemen, I know that I have but a short time to labor in 
my vocation here, and that there is an eternity on which I 
must soon enter. I approach that judgment which cannot 
be long postponed, and do you beheve that under such cir- 
cumstances I would be guilty of that with which I stand 
charged? Ah, no, you do not think I would have the 
cruelty, the folly, to enter into such a conspiracy. You do not 
believe I would have the absurdity to enter into that conspi- 
racy. As Irish gentlemen, put your hands to your hearts, and 
say do you beheve it ? I am sure you do not. Pardon me if 
I have made too free, but I will say there is not one of you 
can spell a conspiracy out of all that was laid before you dur- 
ing the eleven hours in which the Attorney-General was ring- 
ing changes on that word, going backwards and forwards, from 
meeting to meeting, and from pohceman to pohceman, in col- 
ored clothes and out of colored clothes — not one of you can 
beheve that any such conspiracy ever existed. I proclaim, 
firmly, you cannot beheve it. I know your verdict may 
imprison me, and shorten the few days yet before me, but it 
cannot take from me the consciousness that I am entitled to 
your acquittal, and that there is not a man of you who would 



202 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

pronounce a verdict of guilty that would not liimseK be con- 
scious of its being a — mistake. Perhaps what the Attorney- 
General wants you to believe is, that I was a conspirator 
without knowing it — that I fell into a conspiracy as a man 
falls into a pit might, without knowing it was there. This 
was in the open day. I saw the pitfall. Everything was 
clear, and if you believe anj'thing against me, you must be- 
heve I was a conspirator withovit knowing it — a conspirator 
ignorant of conspiracy — and that is the question you are 
selected to try. In the technicahty of law, I would say that 
even in that case there could be no guilt, for there can be no 
guilt without guilty intention : but I scorn to make points of 
law — as a matter of common sense this is plain and obvious, 
and, I trust I may say irresistible. 

Oh, this is a curious invention — this sweeping conspiracy of 
the Attorney-General ! It has been so powerfully j^ut to you 
already that I shall not repeat it at any length, that there 
would be an end to every great movement for the amelioration 
of human institutions if you were to concede to the Attorney- 
General's conspiracy, which has neither been stated nor 
proved. It is a new invention made at this side of the water. 
Some exceedingly sagacious person here first dreamed of it ; 
and you were to be put as it were into a sleep with this incu- 
bus — this imaginary conspiracy — conspiracy resting on your 
consciences and minds. But why was it not sooner invented ? 
There was the slave trade — would that ever be abohshed if the 
Attorney-General's doctrine of conspiracy had been enforced 
as law? "Would it ever have been abolished if the judges of 
the King's Bench had given this doctrine of conspiracy the 
sanction of their authority ? The advocates of the abolition 
of the slave trade had their public meetings, they had their 
monster meetings — they had their aggTegate meetings — they 
had their private meetings ; they pubhshed the guilt of the 
West India planters, and the cruelty of the slave-owners ; 
they made themselves bitter, unrelenting enemies by so do- 
ing ; for it is astonisliing how much malignity arises from that 
inherent, unhappy propensity in man for power and authority. 
There never was a more formidable party than that which was 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 203 

arrayed against tlie slave-owners. They miglit have looked 
in the newspapers, and found every species of guilt charged 
against them by Wilberforce and others. Why was not Wil- 
berforce charged with conspiracy ? That man who wrote his 
name on pages of the most brilHant history and humanities of 
men, who will be revered as long as worth, generosity, and 
piety are in the world. Oh ! he might have stood, as the 
humble individual before you stands, accused of conspiracy, 
because he sought to put an end to the thralldom of the 
slaves. The venerable Clarkson, who is still ahve, might also 
be charged with conspbacy, and thus rendered unsafe in his 
honored old age. 

Ah! gentlemen, do not presume to interfere between hu- 
manity and its resources. Do not venture to arrest the pro- 
gress of any movement for the amelioration of the institutions 
of the country. Do not attempt to take away from your fel- 
low subjects the legitimate mode of effecting useful purposes 
by public meetings, pubHc convassing — speaking bold truths 
boldly and firmly. Shut not men up in dark corners — drive 
them not into concealment — send them not back into conspi- 
racy, for then they would really conspire. In the name of 
Wilberforce and Clarkson I conjure you to dismiss from your 
box with honest and zealous indignation every attempt to pre- 
vent the millions from seeking peaceably and quietly to obtain 
an amelioration of existing institutions. There may be a ht- 
tle ingenuity displayed in reference to this comparison of the 
present movement with that for the abohtion of slavery, and a 
distinction ma}^ be taken. There is a distinction, but the j)rin- 
ciple is the same. 

The next conspiracy was for the abolition of the slave 
trade. I rejoice that I was a sharer in that conspiracy. I 
care not though the gloom of a prison should close upon me, 
my heart rewards me with the consideration that humble, un- 
gifted, and undistinguished as I am, I had the honor to be ■ 
long to that conspu^acy by which the slave trade was abol- 
ished. I attended a meeting for that purpose, and poured 
out, perhaps with more talent than the inspiration of liberty 
could ever give for anything else, my indignant load of con- 



204 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

tempt on those who practiced slavery and trampled under foot 
the humanity and kindliness of our nature. I had a share in 
that movement. Oh, how would they have stared if this doc- 
trine of conspiracy was sooner invented, and the slave bound 
forever, till somebody with milk and water accents — with 
mild tea-table talk endeavored to persuade some one to abol- 
ish it, until some one went to America and spoke soft things 
to the owners of the negroes, and having, in as gentle a way 
as possible, insinuated the atrocities practiced towards the 
slaves, then, by and by to coax the owners, and win upon 
them to consent to the abolition of slavery. Oh, gentlemen, 
it was the calling down of pubHc indignation — the rousing of 
all that was vh'tuous in the public mind, and that Heaven de- 
scended spirit of persevering, open, bold humanity that shook 
off the fetters of the negro, and re-estabUshed him in free- 
dom. What would become of reform in parhament if such 
demonstrations of public opinion had not been made ? Was 
there a man among the Whig aristocracy that did not approve 
of it, not join in such demonstrations ? Were there not great 
meetings held? You have heard of the Birmingham meet- 
ings, and hundreds of other meetings for the purpose of ob- 
taining parliamentary reform. What reform in parhament 
could be obtained without such meetings ? Would the addi- 
tional reform promised in the Queen's speech ever be carried, 
if England did not assemble in her countless thousands ? 
And in Ireland the agitation for Repeal had already extract- 
ed promises of good for Ireland, even from those who had 
been the enemies of the restoration of the Irish parliament. 

At the time of the agitation for Cathohc emancipation, the 
most eminent lawyer of the period — and the Attorney-Gen- 
eral will not think that I pay him no respect when I say he 
was his superior, certainly his equal. He was an eminent 
lawyer, and had a strong, and perhaps conscientious, antipa- 
thy to Catholic emancipation. I do beheve there was no 
more decided or honest opponent of that measure than Mr. 
Saurin. He thought the law was violated by that agitation. 
He prosecuted some of those engaged in it. He was defeated 
in one trial, and he succeeded in another. But would he ever 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. * 205 

dream — would lie in the very wildness of imagination think of 
turning the efforts made for Catholic emancipation into a con- 
spiracy ? I was prosecuted for words spoken. My friend on 
my left (Mr. Shell) was prosecuted for words spoken, but the 
Attorney- General never thought of violating the constitution 
by turning those efforts for emancipation into a conspiracy. 
Yet had not we our county meetings — our simultaneous meet- 
ings ? Did not, on the 30th of January, 1829, all the Catho- 
lics of all the parishes in Ireland meet ? "Was that evidence 
of a conspiracy ? Upon one day every parish in Ireland met. 
On one day they proclaimed a determination to persevere 
till they obtained rehgious equality. No man ever dreamed 
of turning that into a conspiracy. It was reserved for our 
time — it was reserved for our day — it was reserved for the 
glory of the present Attorney-General to have found out that 
which none of his predecessors could possibly discover. 

Gentlemen, at the present moment a very serious question 
is in agitation in England — the Corn Law League. I care not 
what your opinions are with regard to that question — I mean 
no disrespect — they say the object of that league is to obtain 
cheap bread for the poor, and an increased market for labor. 
I do not mean to argue the point with you ; we have enough 
of our own. They have held many meetings, they have used 
the boldest language, and the Rev. Mr. Eisher has accused 
them of inciting to assassination and incendiarism. We are 
free from that accusation, we are free from the slighest imputa- 
tion, and is this case to be sent over to England to put down 
that glorious struggle ? and is the attempt to give cheap bread 
to the poor to be turned into conspiracy? Oh no, gentle- 
men, no ! The English are safe in the glorious integrity of their 
jury box ; there won't be a single juryman sworn to try them 
who differs with them in opinion — there won't be a juryman 
sworn who even differed with violence upon any principle with 
the traversers. No ; the Englishmen are safe — I was wrong 
in saying they were in danger — the Englishmen are safe in the 
protection of their jury box — and do you, gentlemen, protect 
us as the Enghsh protect them. Indeed, it is manifest, if the 
Attorney-General triumphs in this case, no great grievance 
can be redressed. 



206 SELECT SrEECIIES OF DANIEL o'OONNELL. 

When autliority and power aro intovostod it requires a more 
cogent argument than justice to obtain relief, and it is only 
obtained by tlio power of public demonstration, and the accu- 
mulattid Aveight of public opinion. A French author says — I 
do not quote him as an authorit}', for no man hates French 
infidelity and French republican opinions more than I 
do ; but a French author says that " You cannot make a 
revolution with rose water." He would make it Avith blood 
— I would make it with public opinion, and I would put a little 
Irish spirit in it. But I come to the menagerie of evidence 
which sustains this case. I told you there were two classes 
of evidence — if I am not wrong in using the words monster 
meetings and newspaper publications — Ave Avill take each of 
them. I am not hero to deny that these meetings took place. 
I admit that they were held. I admit that the people attended 
them in hundreds and hundreds of thousands, but it has been 
said tliat the magnitude of these meetings Avould alone make 
them illegal. I do not discuss that question. I do not give 
it Aveight enough to do so. But I again admit that they took 
place, and I Avill ask you, Avas any life lost at any of those 
meetings'? You Avill ansAver no! not one! Was any man, 
Avonnin, or child injured? You Avill ansAver no! imanimously 
no ! Did an accident happen to any living thing so as to in- 
jure it in the sKghtest degree ? Was there a single female, 
young or old, exposed to the slightest indelicacy ? AVas there 
one sliilling's Avorth of property destroyed at any one of those 
meetings ? You Avill answer me, unanimously no ! Oh, but I 
forgot — there Avas a policeman in colored clothes Avho de- 
scribed a ferocious assault made by the people coming in from 
CarloAV, Avhich very nearly overturned the gingerbread and ap- 
ple stands of the old Avomen — and the amount of violence 
perpetrated Avas the OA'crturning of some gingerbread stands. 
If tliere had been any violence committed Avould we not have 
heard of it ? Avould it not have been proved by the policemen 
or magistrates Avho attended ? 

Oh, gentlemen, it is ridiculous — that is, it is the prosecutions 
Avhicli are so. There Avas no violence, no batter}^ no assault, 
no injury to property, not the least violation of morahty, or 
even of good manners. Not one accident happened at one of 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 207 

those meetings ; not even a casual accident ; and if I incited 
the people, and had them ready for rebellion, would they have 
been thus restrained ? and would they not have committed 
outrages by which their feelings would have been manifested ? 
But no, so completely were they devoid of ill-feeling, so com- 
pletely had every harmonizing influence sway over them, that 
grown mothers and young mothers carried their infants with 
them as their best and surest protection. Oh, it would delight 
you to have seen them ! The men stood back for them to pass ! 
the mothers and daughters knew that they had their husbands 
and brothers there, and so help me Heaven ! I withdraw the 
violence of expression, and I say, that there could not have 
been a more convincing and triumphant evidence of the total 
absence of irritated feelings, than the kind of feeling which 
they evinced. I turn boldly and say, the world does not pro- 
duce a country where such meetings could take place. They 
could only occur among this calumniated people, who, accord- 
ing to the Times, are " a filthy and felonious multitude." 
Yes, there are no people on the face of the earth, except the 
Irish people alone, who could afford such a specimen of moral 
dignity and elevation. They have been educated to it — forty 
years have they been so — the Emancipation educated them, 
and now they are sublimed into peaceful determination. They 
will not be ruffled by anything which may have happened in 
this court. They will abide your verdict ; they may disap- 
prove of it if it is unfavorable, but they will not be guilty of 
the sHghtest violation of the law. But was any one intimi- 
dated by those meetings ? They could have produced magis- 
trates or policemen, one by one, to prove their intimidation. 
They could have produced the most timid, either in pantaloons 
or petticoats, to prove there was intimidation. With the most 
ample means of proof, there is the greatest neglect of evidence. 
My lord, I appeal to your lordships, if there was one particle 
of intimidation — is there one particle of such evidence before 
you? And is it not thoroughly certain that it is so only be- 
cause such evidence is not in existence ? Gentlemen of the 
jury, it is not that alone — it is not purely inferential — the 
pohce were at the meetings ; they might have asked if any 
one complained to them — whether the most timid person in 



208 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'COl^JNELL. 

the neigliborliood or vicinage expressed alarm or apprehen- 
sion. They asked them no such question ; it had been an- 
swered abeady. 

Now, my lord, there was another feature in those meetings, to 
which I shall beg to call your attention. There was not one of 
those meetings at which any mandate from authority was dis- 
regarded ; no proclamation was disregarded, no magisterial 
warning resisted in the lightest degree. There was no message 
or personal intimation from any justice of the peace treated 
with disregard — no police inspector, or sub-inspector, or con- 
stable disobeyed. Recollect that, my lords — ^remember that, 
gentlemen of the jury. There is not the shghtest evidence of 
even the smallest disregard of legal authority. If we were 
seditious, why did we not get some warning ? Why was there 
not a proclamation issued against these meetings? Oh! but 
there was a proclamation at length. I do not hke to enter 
upon any angry topic ; but that proclamation was immediately 
obeyed. You have no evidence of any conspiracy in any one of 
them, no evidence of anything but a ready submission and 
obedience to the law. Conspiracy — shame on those who in- 
vented such a term, as applied to men laboring, as we were, 
in the sacred cause of our country's hberty — obeying the laws, 
committing no violence. No, my lords, no. "We have had 
many misfortunes in this country, many afflictions, many 
things to endure. Oh, gentlemen, your verdict will not be an 
additional one. It will be such a verdict as will calm the 
troubled waters. If those meetings were tranquil before, why 
there is no need of it. If the language was harsh or violent 
your verdict will soothe and soften it. Even the excuse of 
violent language they shall never have again. No, gentlemen, 
they were not illegal meetings, they were meetings, as I will 
show you, suited to the purpose they had in view. If it were 
at one, or two, or three, or ten of them that tranquillity had 
prevailed, it would, perhaps, seem casual, but at every one of 
them the behavior of the people was the same. The entire 
thirty-seven included in the indictment come within the same 
catalogue. It could have been by nothing but design, when 
you accumulate the number, that the same peaceful demeanor 
prevailed at aU of them. The government knew of them ; why 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 209 

•was not their illegality previously imputed to them, if it ex- 
isted ? I am not one of those who would insinuate or say 
that the Attorney-General meant to urge them into criminahty, 
in order that he might pounce upon them. I say no such 
thing — I would do him more justice. He did not previously 
interfere, because there were no grounds for a prosecution — 
there was nothing to warrant his interference. That is his 
defence. And I do not attach any criminality to him for not 
having interfered with them before. 

[Mr. O'Connell here had a short conversation with Mr. Shiel, 
after which the learned gentleman resumed.] 

I am told that I used an equivocal word — I said that those 
meetings were quiet by design. I repeat it. The design pre- 
existed long before one of them was held — the design to be 
quiet and peaceable existed, and it will continue to exist. 
There was no such arrangement for any particular meeting. 
That was the education which I spoke of the Irish people 
having received — the education that the only certain way to 
establish thek rights, and to obtain valuable amelioration and 
free institutions, was by peaceable conduct and obedience to 
the laws. I ask you, gentlemen, what evidence is there of a 
conspiracy from what has passed at any of these meetings ? 
I leave it to your conscience — to your integrity, to answer the 
question. What care I what your politics are — ^you will an- 
swer before your Maker for the verdict you pronounce — I 
leave the responsibihty to you. This is one part of the con- 
spiracy, and the next is the pubhcations in the newspapers. 
Do not imagine I am going to detain you in canvassing all the 
phrases and sentences that have appeared in these papers. I 
am not. You have been powerfully addressed on that topic 
already. I shall take up the general nature of the evidence 
of those newspapers, from which you are called upon to 
fabricate a conspiracy. I submit that, with the exception of 
what is proved to have been delivered by me, the evidence of 
these newspapers is no evidence against me, unless the con- 
spiracy is first proved. And see what a chcle that would lead 
you into. Are you to find the evidence of conspiracy from 
the newspapers ? The newspapers are no evidence against me 



210 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

unless I be first proved to be a conspirator. Be that as it may, 
I shall leave it to the court as a matter of law, but I leave to 
you the weight, the worth of the evidence, should that evidence 
go to you at all. Suppose it does, what is there in it against 
me ? — what is its substantial weight against me ? Is there any 
proof that I ever saw one of those newspapers ? Is there any 
proof of any connexion between me and those newspapers ? It 
will appear by the dates that when some of the harshest pas- 
sages in them were printed I was not in town — I was attending 
those meetings in the country, and it was moved that at the 
association I distinctly disavowed that any newspaper was the 
organ of it. But it is said that we circulated these newspa- 
papers. See what the fact is. Those who subscribed a certain 
amount allocated a portion of it, according to our rules, to the 
purchase of a newspaper, and they were entitled to any paper 
they might select. The evidence is not that we selected any 
newspaper for them, but they ordered any one they pleased ; 
and bear in mind at the same time that we proclaimed that 
not one of them was the organ of the association. It is said 
that these newspapers contained libels. If they did why were 
they not prosecuted ? They were answerable for it under the 
law of libel. That should be our protection, if there were 
libels in them. The Attorney-General was competent to in- 
stitute a prosecution. It was not our duty to examine them — 
it was his. But the fact is, the Attorney-General would have 
prosecuted every one of those newspapers long ago if he 
thought it worth his while. 

Every great newspaper " we," imagines himself a man of 
great importance ; but when once these newspapers are read 
— if read at all — they are forgotten ; and, I would venture to 
say, that not a particle of what is charged here as pubhshed 
by them would be thought of now if it was not for these trials. 
They are ephemeral productions — we are accustomed to 
them — they are either read and forgotten, or not read and 
passed by. But what is it they are charged with ? Exciting 
the people to violence and tumult. Did any one of them 
produce such an effect? Was there any sort of violence 
among the people ? You, gentlemen, have to decide whether 
that pohtical problem I have sought to solve — whether the 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 211 

political theory I liave sought to realize, that which has been 
the leading principle of my pohtical life — is one in its nature 
to be considered fairly, honestly, and liberally. Yes, gentle- 
men, if you thus regard it you will take the whole tenor of my 
past life into consideration before you come to a conclusion as 
to the verdict which you ought to return, and you will form 
your judgment by a reference to the great and leading princi- 
ples of my political career. 

It appears to me that the Attorney-General himself, if I 
did not misconceive the drift of his observations, admitted 
the peaceable nature of my intentions ; and of this there cer- 
tainly can be no doubt, that the newspapers which have been 
given in evidence against me are full to overflowing with my 
admonitions to the people to observe the laws and to yield 
the most impUcit obedience to everything having the shape 
and semblance of legal authority. Evidence the most con- 
vincing has been adduced, even by the Crown, to demonstrate 
what the great principle was upon which the Repeal move- 
ment was founded and designed. It has been proved to you 
that this maxim received universal acceptation among us — 
that the man who commits a crime gives strength to the 
enemy. This sentiment was printed upon flags and banners 
— it was attached to all our documents — ^it was inscribed upon 
our platform, and painted on the walls of the association. 
It was universally acknowledged among us as the cardinal 
maxim of our political hves, and was the topic of our con- 
versation. We left nothing undone to impress upon the minds 
of those who joined the movement that the man who com- 
mitted an offence against the law gave strength to whoever 
might be the enemy of our cause. Such was the principle 
that we proclaimed. It may be said that it was one that 
savored of hostility ; but if so, it had only a stronger effect on 
that account. You have heard again and again of my as- 
sertion that the most desirable of all political amehorations 
were purchased at too dear a price if they could only be ob- 
tained at the expense of human blood. That is the principle 
of my pohtical career ; and if I stand prominent among men 
for anything, it is for the fearless and unceasing announcement 
of that principle. 



212 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

From the day wlien first I entered tlie arena of politics until 
the present hour I have never neglected an o]Dportunity of 
impressing upon the minds of my fellow-countrymen the fact, 
that I was an apostle of that poHtical sect who held that lib- 
erty was only to be attained under svich agencies as were 
strictly consistent with the law and the constitution — that 
freedom was to be attained, not by the effusion of human 
blood, but by the constitutional combination of good and wise 
men — by perseverance in the courses of tranquilHty and good 
order, and by an utter abhorrence of violence and bloodshed. It 
is my prudent boast, that throughout a long and eventful hfe 
I have faithfully devoted myseK to the promulgation of that 
principle, and, without vanity, I can assert, that I am the first 
pubhc man who ever proclaimed it. Other pohticians have 
said, ' win your liberties by peaceful means if you can,' but 
there was a arriere pensee in this admonition, and they always 
had in contemplation an appeal to physical force, in case 
other means should prove abortive. But I am not one of 
these. I have preached under every contingency, and I have 
again and again declared my intention to abandon the cause 
of Eepeal if a single drop of human blood were shed by those 
who advocated the measure. I made the same principle the 
basis for the movement in favor of Catholic Emancipation ; and 
it was by a rigid adherence to that principle that I conducted 
the movement to a glorious and triumphant issue. It is my 
boast that Catholic Emancipation, and every achievement of 
my pohtical life, was obtained without violence and blood- 
shed ; and is it fair, I ask you, gentlemen, that you should be 
called upon at this hour of the day to interrupt a man who 
has laid that down as the basis of his pohtical conduct, and 
who at no period of his existence was ever known to deviate 
from the maxim ? Is it right that men of honesty and intelli- 
gence should be called upon to brand now as a participator in 
conspiracy the man who has been preaching peace, law and 
order during his whole life, and has invariably deprecated and 
denounced the idea that the objects of his pohtical life were 
to be attained by an appeal to violent means ? 

Gentlemen, I belong to a Christian persuasion, with wiiose 
members it is a principle of doctrinal behef that no advantage 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 213 

to churcli or state — no, not even Heaven can be sought to be 
attained at the expense of any crime whatsoever ; that no sin 
is to be justified or paUiated by any account of advantage, 
however enormous, that may possibly be obtained by its com- 
mission. If there were in that box a single member of my 
own religious persuasion there would be no necessity for my 
impressing this fact upon your minds, for he could tell you that 
he professed that same doctrine in common with myself. All 
my life I have studiously endeavored to model my pohtical 
conduct according to the standard of that maxim of my reli- 
gious belief, and, therefore, should you now be called upon to 
do your judgment and common sense the violence of believing 
that I could proclaim one thing and practice another, I fear- 
lessly assert that there is no circumstance of my life, from 
my birth to the present hour, which can warrant you in 
doubting the sincerity of my professions. It will appear from 
reference to the newspapers that have been given in evidence 
— and even though there were no newspapers, the fact is so 
notorious as to admit of no dispute — that no man ever pos- 
sessed so much of the confidence of the Irish people as I. No 
man enjoyed it so unremittingly, and in so large a degree. 1 
have obtained the confidence of all classes of the Cathohc 
laity, not of the poor CathoHcs alone whose condition might 
be ameliorated by any charge but of the middle and higher 
classes also. I have also the honor of enjoying the confidence 
of the Catholic clergy, and the Cathohc episcopacy, and to 
what am I to attribute the possession of their good graces 
unless to the assertion of this principle and to the imswerving 
fidehty with which through all the vicissitudes of my pohtical 
life I have invariably adhered to it. How long could I possess 
their confidence if I were the base deceiver I am pictured ? 
Not an hour. But I possess their confidence, because they 
are thoroughly convinced of the sincerity and integrity of pur- 
pose with which I have announced my sentiments. 

I am here surrounded by my countrymen, who have con- 
fided their cause to my management, for no other reason than 
that they have the fullest possible reliance on the sincerity 
with which, during a period of forty years, I have proclaimed 
the doctrine that the man who committs a crime injures the 



2 14 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

cause lie espouses, and strengthens the hands of those who 
are its antagonists. My whole life is a refutation of the accu- 
sation that I am insincere ; and is the invidious task now to 
be assigned to you, gentlemen, of branding your countrymen 
as fools and dotards — men who patronize hypocrisy, and who 
for near half a century have suffered themselves to be befooled 
and deluded by empty pretences ? The public will not be- 
Heve it — England will not beheve it — nor will any enhghtened 
country in creation beheve it. I am here pleading before the 
European world. I am here pleading the cause of my countiy 
before a jury of Protestant gentlemen, in presence of the kings 
and people of the universe, and with what amazement will they 
not gaze upon you if by a verdict which doubts for a moment 
the sincerity of my political professions, you brand as fools 
and dotards millions of your CathoHc fellow countrymen, and 
with them, many, very many Protestants of the gTeatest intel- 
hgence and the highest possible respectabihty. No, you can- 
not for a moment question the honest sincerity with which I 
have ever advocated that glorious principle, the advocating of 
which was the pride of my youth, the glory of my manhood, 
and the comfort of my dechning years. I feel I have not done 
you justice in pressing this topic at such length upon your 
consideration. Such prolixity was unnecessary ; for I am 
sure you are wholly incapable of taking such a view of my 
conduct as that insisted on by the Crown. 

The only farther observation which I will offer upon this 
branch of the case is merely to state that I doubt whether my 
sincerity in this respect has ever been questioned, even by the 
most implacable of my enemies. I do not think that it was 
ever pubUcly impugned, and certain I am that it ought never 
to have been impugned either publicly or privately. It is ut- 
terly impossible for me to believe that after having been so 
successful in my endeavor to obtain popular rights by means 
purely consistent with justice, humanity, the law, and the con- 
stitution, I could now fling to the winds every principle of my 
bygone life, and assume the character and play the part of a 
conspirator. Nothing in my public conduct, I must again re- 
peat, could justify such a suspicion. Nay, I fearlessly aver, 
there are incidents in my pubhc Hfe which give the he to any 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 215 

sucli suspicion. Permit me to instance a few facts : you must 
all remember what a frightful combination existed eight years 
ago among the workmen and operatives of the city of Dublin. 
Lives were lost in oui* pubhc streets, or men were assaulted 
with such brutal violence that, if death did not ensne, the cir- 
cumstance was to be attributed rather to a happy accident than 
to any forbearance on the part of the conspirators. The com- 
bination had spread to such a dreadful extent that the pubhc 
authorities were unable to cope with it. 

It has been frequently alleged against me by my enemies 
that I am a man who would sacrifice principle to popularity. 
How stands the fact ? I came forward, I opposed the combi- 
nation publicly, single-handed, and opposed them at the peril, 
not only of my popularity, but of my very existence. The fact 
is notorious in Dubhn. At the meeting in the Exchange the 
operatives were infuriated against me, and I owed the preser- 
vation of my Hfe to the police. But it was my duty to oppose 
the combination, and I did not shrink from it ; I persevered 
in it, and what occurred ? I persuaded those who had been 
most ferocious against me, and from that day to this not a sin- 
gle combiaation outrage has occurred in Dublin. I opposed 
combination at the expense of popularity — at the risk of hfe ; 
and is it credible, I ask you, that I should have taken that 
part to play the hypocrite somewhere else ? It was not in 
that alone that I exhibited* my abhorrence of violence of any 
kind ; for don't you find throughout these newspapers my 
perpetual opposition to Eibbonism ? have they not read over 
and over to you my denunciations of Ribbonism — my warning 
to the people — my denunciations of the system to the police ? 
calling on them in time to stop its progress ? Oh, if there was 
any conspiracy, would I not be glad to be assisted by the con- 
spirators ? If my means were iniquitous, would I not have 
the advantage of that iniquity ? I had influence — I had only 
to countenance the Eibbonmen, and Heaven knows how far 
it would have extended ! It has been stated over and over 
again — it is part of the prosecution — my discountenance of 
these Eibbonmen ; nay, more, my resistance to all secret socie- 
ties — my constant denunciation of them. Oh, do but take 
these things into your consideration, and say in your con- 



216 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

science, if you can, that man is a hypocrite, who, without any- 
thing in the world to move him but adherence to his principles, 
flung away the instrument that would tarnish his cause, how- 
ever useful it might be. 

Another thing in my public life was that I opposed, at the 
risk of my popularity, and loss of popularity, the present sys- 
tem of poor-laws. With the inflaences I possess, could not I 
have roused the poverty of Ireland against its property, and 
insisted that all that were poor should be fed by all that were 
rich, as otla,ers did ? No ; I saw the danger of such a proceed- 
ing. I was taunted by many a sincere friend — sneered at by 
men who have joined me again. No, no ; I consulted my con- 
science, and that conscience told me that the real nature of 
the provision, makes more destitute than it relieves — that its 
machinery must be the great burden on the property of the 
country. But, my lords, since it became law, I have not given 
it any opposition. I have allowed the experiment to be tried, 
and those who were most inimical before have vowed that I 
was right, and they were wrong, and I am ready to amehorate 
it, and assist its working if I can. 

Gentlemen, you also recoUect it is given in evidence the 
manner of my answer to young Mr. Tyler's sj)eech and letter ; 
you saw from that and from the speech given in evidence by 
Mr. Bond Hughes ; and now, my lords, as I have mentioned 
that name, I think it right to say that as I was one of those 
convinced that that gentleman had willfully sworn what was 
not true, I am glad to have mentioned his name, because it 
affords me an opportunity I am proud to take of stating, that 
I never saw a witness on the table who gave his evidence more 
fairly than Mr. Bond Hughes, and I am thoroughly convinced 
that the contradiction in his evidence was a mistake that any 
honest man might fall into. It is not part of this case, but I 
am sure your lordship don't think me wrong in making this 
pubhc avowal. 

Gentlemen, it appears by his report also, how emphatically 
I informed the Americans that we were anxious for sympathy 
from them, but that we would take no part, in the slightest 
degree, disparagmg of our allegiance. But that is put still 
more strongly when you recollect the denunciations I made of 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 217 

the American slave owners. Large sums of money were sent 
from the American slave-holding states — the remittances were 
in progress — money was in progress of collection in Charles- 
ton, South Carolina ; but did I mitigate my tone, or moderate 
my language in condemning the principle of slavery ? Did 
I not denounce the slave owners as enemies of God and of 
man — as culprits and criminals ? Did I not compare associa- 
tion with them to association with pickpockets and felons? 
Did I not use the most emphatic language to express my de- 
nunciation of the horrible traffic in human beings — of all the 
immorality, and all the frightful horrors that belong to that 
system ? Oh, if I was a hypocrite, would I not have passed 
over the topic with a few soft words, and have accepted their 
sympathy. Is there hypocrisy in my pubhc sentiments that 
no amehoration in any pubhc institution can be worth one drop 
of blood? 

Gentlemen, you have in the newspapers, also, that the demo- 
cratic party in France, headed by Monsieur Ledru EoUin, 
offered us sympathy and support. It is a considerable party — 
it is a powerful party — it is the party that hates the English — 
the party most of all ferocious against England, a hatred which 
arose from the blow their vanity got at Waterloo. You have 
my answer to that offer. Did I seek his support, or the sup- 
port of his party ? Did I mitigate and frame my answer in a 
way that I should appear unwilling to accept that support, but 
really allow it ? No ; I took the firm tone of loyalty — I reject 
their support — ^I refused the offer ; I cautioned him against 
coming over here, for we would do nothing inconsistent with 
our loyalty; and is that the way in which my hypocrisy is 
proved ? Gentlemen, it was not that party in France alone 
that I defied. Even at their present monarch I have hurled 
my defiance. To be sure, the Attorney-General, with great 
ingenuity, introduced a report of the secret committee of the 
House of Commons in Ireland, in 1797, and he said we were 
acting on that plan. They were looking for French assist- 
ance — they had Irish emissaries in France — they had prob- 
ably persons representing the French here — acting on the 
plan ; imitating the conduct of the United Irishmen in 1797 ! 
Oh, gentlemen, it was directly the reverse. 



218 SELECT SrEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

It may be said I speculate on the restoration of the elder 
branch of that family — Henry Y., as he is called. I would be 
very sorry to wait for a Repeal of the Union till that occurs, 
not that I disparage his title — for my opinion is, that Europe 
will never be perfectly safe until that branch of the Bourbon 
family be restored under liberal institutions. But I refused 
an}'", even the slightest assistance from that party. I hvirled 
the indignation of my mind against the man that would force 
the children of France to be educated by infidel professors. I 
am not entering into the topic farther than you have seen by 
these reports of my antagonism to the French government. 

There is another matter in my life — my opposition to the 
Chartists. Recollect, gentlemen, that when the Repeal Asso- 
ciation was in full force, the Chartists were in insurrection in 
England — that they were entering in hundreds and thousands 
into the manufacturing towns of England — recollect, gentle- 
men, that there is something fascinating to all the poorer 
classes in Chartism. Oh ! il I was playing the hypocrite, 
would I not have been mitigated in my tone respecting them? 
I did denounce them. I kept the Irish in England from join- 
ing them. The very moment a Chartist subscribed to the 
funds of the association his money was handed back to him, 
and his name struck off our hst. Now, if my object was pop- 
ular insurrection, good Heaven ! would not any man in my 
situation have wished to have strength ? There was no oath 
to be taken — ^no danger of the penalties of the law — yet I dis- 
countenanced Chartism. And, my lord, I do firmly declare, 
that is my conscientious conviction, that if I did not interfere, 
Chartism would have spread from one end of Ireland to the 
other. Gentlemen of the jury, these were the societies I suc- 
ceeded in driving from Ireland, and I am to be charged with 
a conspiracy for tliis ! 

Another point to which I will call j^our attention is this — it 
has been my constant aim to pay the most devoted allegiance 
to the Queen ; you have it in evidence, and you have heard it 
read out of all the newspapers, that the name was treated 
with the utmost respect, attention, regard, and dehght, in 
every place, by the Irish people. I have never made a speech 
which did not breathe the most dutiful and afi'ectionate loyalty 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DErENCE. 219 

to her person, crown, and dignity. I stand here and repeat, I 
never made a disloyal speech ; I always made a difference be- 
tween the Queen and her ministers, and the Attorney-General 
has no right to say that I ever uttered one particle of disloy- 
alty in arraigning the speech alluded to. When I spoke, I 
made the distinction between the minister and the sovereign, 
and I say there is not a particle or taint of disloyalty in the 
observations I made. I answered that speech, not as the 
speech of the Queen, but of the minister of the day, and I 
say there is no taint of disloyalty in it. I am come to a time 
of Hfe when she can do nothing for me ; and yet I am sure 
there is not a man in the court who could infer that I meant 
disloyalty. 

In one thing I think the Attorney-General did not act fairly 
to me ; and it does afflict me that I should be charged with 
disloyalty to the sovereign in the manner as he has sought to 
fasten it on me. In speaking of the ministry, the word Judy 
occurred, and then the Attorney-General tells you I called the 
Queen a fishwoman. That speech had no reference to the 
Queen at all — don't beUeve it ; I feel angry at it. That speech 
had reference to the minister alone, and to him I applied the 
term " Judy," and nothing else, and it is utterly false that I 
used the word to the Queen ; and I here disclaim, abjure, and 
disavow the man who would be capable of using such language 
to the sovereign. 

No matter what I may be accused of, I have never been 
accused of disloyalty or disaffection to my sovereign, and I 
repeat I never did any such thing as the Attorney-General has 
stated to you. When I did use strong language, I have 
always distinguished between the Queen and her ministers. 
Gentlemen, I fear I have detained you rather longer on this 
point than I had intended, but I have to judge of my case by 
referring you to my public conduct which is fully before you. 
I may have talents, and whatever they were I must now say, 
in the decline and evening of my Ufe, that my long and ardent 
deske was breathed for the liberties of my country. 

G'entlemen, it was said the meetings, when they took place, 
had some object ; so they had : the Repeal of the Union. Was 
that a bad or injmious purpose ? I deliberately say it was 



220 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

not ; no, it was the most useful tliat could possibly be had for 
the benefit of this country. I say there is not a man in this 
court, the neutrality of the court alone excepted, that ought 
not to be a Repealer, and I think before I sit down I will make 
you aU Eepealers. I will show it is your duty to join the Re- 
peal cause, and then I am sure you will have pleasure in doing 
so. I mean, in the first place, to show you the destruction 
caused in this country by the Enghsh parliament — that it had 
from the most remote period watched this country with a nar- 
row jealousy. I wiU give you some evidence regarding the 
woolen manufacturers of this coimtry. It is a long time ago, 
and occurred in the reign of a King whose actions you are not 
inclined to condemn. I will show that the settlement of 1782 
was to be a final adjudication and establishment of the Irish 
parhament forever. In the next place, I wiU. show you the 
great prosperity of Ireland subsequent to that period. I will 
next show you that the Union was founded in the grossest 
injustice and frauds — I will show you the distress that followed 
the Union statute — I wiU show you the ill-treatment of Ire- 
land by England, which is a matter of history so well known, 
that I will not detain you on the point. Yet, being brought 
here by the Attorney-General, my defence i^, that I am not 
looking for what is injurious to the country, but for what 
would be of the greatest possible benefit to this country. I 
have a right to this ; for I have represented the county of 
Clare, with 250,000 inhabitants ; I have represented Waterford, 
with 300,000 inhabitants ; I have rejaresented Kerry with 
260,000 inhabitants ; I have represented Meath with 300,000 
inhabitants ; and I now stand here, the proud representative 
of the county of Cork, with her 730,000 inhabitants; and I 
feel it a duty I owe to the country, to state that I am seeking 
what will benefit her inhabitants. I twice represented the 
city of Dubhn, and I feel gratitude to the Irish people for the 
confidence reposed in me, and I here stand up to demand for 
her just rights and privileges. I first propose to show the 
misgovernment of Ireland by England, and I will do so from 
a French author. He was a historian, and one of the literati 
of France, and I will give you his description. Hear what he 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 221 

says. It is from Thierry's History of the Conquest of Eng- 
land by the Normans, 3d vol., p. 430 : 

" Tlie conquest of Ireland by the Anglo-Normans is perhaps the only 
one which has not been followed by gradual ameUoration in the condition 
of the conquered people. In England the descendants of the Anglo-Sax- 
ons, though unable to free themselves from the dominion of the con- 
queror, advanced rapidly in prosperity and civilization. But the native 
Ii-ish, apparently placed in similar circumstances, have for five centuries 
exhibited a state of uniform decline. And yet this people are endowed 
by nature with great quiclmess of parts, and a remarkable aptitude for 
every description of intellectual labor. The soil of Ireland is fertile and 
adapted to cultivation ; yet its fertility has been equally unprofitable to 
the conquerors and the conquered, and the descendants of the Norman, 
notwithstanding the extent of their possessions, have become gradually 
as impoverished as the Irish themselves. This singular destiny, which 
presses with equal weight upon the ancient inhabitants and the more re- 
cent settlers of Ii-eland, is the consequence of their proximity to Eng- 
land, and of the influence which, ever since the Conquest, the govern- 
ment of the latter country has constantly exercised over the internal affairs 
of the former." 

There is a disinterested and impartial history giving you 
this melancholy picture of the state of things, and you see it 
is all owing to the baneful influence of the English govern- 
ment on this country. The next authority which I shah quote 
is not one that would be found in the same ranks with the 
last — it is Mr. Pitt. In speaking of the commercial proposi- 
tions of 1785, I find he, says : 

" The uniform policy of England had been to deprive Ireland of the 
use of her own resources, and to make her subservient to the interests 
and the opulence of the English people." 

That is not my language, gentlemen ; they are the words of 
Pitt, avowing that the pohcy of England had always been to 
use Ireland for her own purposes. I will read another author- 
ity of more consideration with you — it is that of the Lord 
Chief Justice Bushe, delivered in parliament in 1799 : 

" You are called upon to give up your independence, and to whom are 
you called upon to give it up ? To a nation which for six hundred 
years has treated you with uniform injustice and oppression." 

These, recollect, are the words of Lord Chief Justice Bushe, 
and not mine. 



222 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

" The ti'easury bench startles at the assertion — non mens hie sermo est. 
If the treasury bench scold me, Mr. Pitt will scold them — it is the asser- 
tion in so many words in his speech. Ireland, says he, has always been 
treated with injustice and ilUberality. Ireland, says Junius, has been 
uniformly plundered and oppressed. This is not the slander of Junius, 
nor the candor of Pitt — it is history. For centuries has the British par- 
liament and nation kept you down, shackled your commerce, and parar 
lyzed your exertions ; despised your characters, and ridiculed your pre- 
tensions to any privileges, commercial or constitutional. She has never 
conceded a point to you which she could avoid, or granted a favor which 
was not reluctantly distilled. They have been all wrung from her like 
drops of her blood." 

The words are not mine, gentlemen. 

"And you are not in possession of a single blessing (except those 
which you derive from God) that has not been either purchased or ex- 
torted by the virtue of your own parUament from the ilhberality of Eng- 
land." 

In 1798, when a government pamphlet was pubhshed by 
Mr. Secretary Cooke, which first broached the subject of the 
Repeal of the Union, he says : 

" A Union was the only means of preventing Ireland from growing too 
great and too powerful." At the same time admitting — " When one na- 
tion is coerced to unite with another, such union savors of subjection." 

I will quote again from Lord Chief Justice Bushe : 

" In denouncing England's intolerance of Ireland's prosperity, during 
the debates on the Union, he used the following language : "I strip 
this formidable measure of aU its pretensions and all its aggravations : I 
look on it nakedly and abstractedly, and I see nothing in it but one 
question — wiU you give up the countiy ? I forget for a moment the un- 
principled means by which it has been promoted — I pass by for a moment 
the unseasonable time at which it has been introduced, and the contempt 
of parliament upon which it is bottomed, and I look upon it simply as Eng- 
land reclaiming, in a moment of your weakness, that dominion which you 
extorted from her in a moment of your virtue — a dominion which she uni- 
formly abused — which invariably oppressed and impoverished you, and 
from the cessation of which you date aU your iDrosiDerity. It is a measure 
which goes to degrade the country, by saying it is unfit to govern herself, 
and to stultify the parhameut by saying it is incapable of governing the 
country. It is the revival of the odious and absurd title of conquest; it is 
the renewal of the abominable distinction between mother country and 
colony which lost America ; it is the denial of the rights of nature to 
a great nation from an intolerance of its prosperity." 



SPEECH IN niS OWN DEFENCE. 223 

From tlie commencement I told you I would prove that it 
was hatred of the prosperity of Ireland ; and if he who ut- 
tered that opinion were here to-day, he would avow it. These 
topics were almost forgotten, and I am obliged to the Attorney - 
General for having reminded me of them, I will read another 
document to prove that the English pohcy has always been 
against the amalgamation of the Irish people. It is an extract 
from a letter from Primate Boulter to the Duke of Newcastle, 
which is dated Dubhn, January 9th, 1724 : 

" I have made it my business to talk with several of the most leading 
men in parliament, and have employed others to pick up whafc they could 
learn from a variety of peo]ple : and I feel by my own and others' 
inquiry that the people of every religion, country, and party heie, are 
alike set against Wood's halfpence, and that their agreement in this has 
had a very unhappy influence on the state of this nation, by bringing 
on intimacies between Papists and Jacobites and the Whigs who before 
had no correspondence with them ; so 'tis questioned whether (if there 
were occasion) the justice of the peace could be found who would be 
strict in disarming the Papists." 

Mark, gentlemen, the paternal feeling of the government of 
that day. " It spurned, as an ' unliappy influence,' the intima- 
cy between the Papists and Whigs." Gentlemen, have I not 
now proved what I said — ^by the authority of Thierry, of Pitt, 
of Bushe, and of Primate Boulter ? And I conjure you to re- 
member that opinion of Bushe — that the oppression of Ire- 
land arose from an intolerance of her prosperity. And he ut- 
tered that sentiment uncontradicted. I will next bring your 
attention to the transactions of 1782 — that period which must 
be famiUar to your recollections — the one bright spot — the one 
green oasis in the desert surrounding it. The transactions of 
1782 were of consummate advantage to England. She was then 
assailed upon every side. America had first rebelled, and 
afterward separated from her. She wanted Ireland. Being 
without troops to garrison her citadels and secure her safety, 
the gentlemen of Ireland armed. But did they think of sepa- 
ration ? No ; they asserted their right to an independent leg- 
islature and free trade, and they obtained both, for it was not 
safe to refuse them. The adjustment which then took place 
between the two countries was declared to be a final one. The 



224 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONKELL. 

Englisli House of Lords said so, the Commons said the same, 
the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland announced it, and the two 
British houses of parhament declared it was a final adjust- 
ment. And how was it got rid of ? I will show jou. [Mr. 
O'Connell read the document.] 

Such were the principles in which that great settlement was 
brought about ; and do you know, or did you know in your 
lives a single individual who was a Volunteer in 1782 that to 
the last moment of his Hfe did not boast of having participat- 
ed in that mighty and most salutary change ? It was glorious 
to Ireland to preserve thek allegiance, and join it with Hberty — 
to ascertain constitutional rights, and obtain legislative inde- 
pendence. The connexion with England was stronger — the 
connexion was never disputed, but proclaimed by the patriots 
of that day, and the connexion was preserved by that measure. 

I am asked whether I have proved that the prophecy of Mr. 
Fox was realized, that the prosperity that was promised to 
Ireland was actually gained by reason of her legislative inde- 
pendence. Now, pray listen to me. I will tell you the evi- 
dence by which I shall demonstrate this fact. It is curious 
that the first of them is from Mr. Pitt, again, in the speech he 
made in 1799, in favor of the resolutions for carrying the 
Union. If he could have shown that Ireland was in distress 
and destitution — that her commerce was lessened — that her 
manufactures were diminished — that she was in a state of suf- 
fering and want, by reason of, or during the legislative inde- 
pendence of the country — of course he would have made it his 
topic in support of his case, to show that separate legislatures 
had worked badly, and produced calamities and not blessings ; 
but the fact was too powerful for him. But his vicious inge- 
nuity availed itseK of the fact, which fact he admitted ; and 
let us see how he admitted it. He admitted the prosperity of 
Ireland ; there was his reasoning. Now mark it — " As Ire- 
land," he said, " was so prosperous under her own parliament, 
we can calculate that the amount of that prosperity will be 
treble under a British legislature." He first quoted a speech 
of Mr. Foster's in 1785, in these words — " The expoi-tation of 
Irish produce to England amounts to two millions and a half 
annually, and the exportation of British produce to Ii-eland 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 225 

amounts to one million." Instead of saying you are in want 
and destitution, unite witli England, and you will be prosper- 
ous — iie was driven to admit this. Ireland is prosperous 
now with her own parhament, but it will be trebly prosperous 
when you give up that parhament, or have it joined with the 
parhament of England. So absurd a proposition was never 
uttered ; but it shows this, how completely forced he was to 
admit Irish prosperity, when no other argument was left in 
his power, but the absurd observation I have read to you. He 
gives another quotation from Foster, in which it is said : 

"Britain imports annually £2,500,000 of our products, all, or very 
nearly all, duty free, and we import almost a million of hers, and raise a 
revenue on almost every article of it." 

This relates to the year 1785. Pitt goes on to say : 

"But liow stands the case now [1799] ? The trade at this time is 
infinitely more advantageous to Ireland. It wiU be proved from the 
documents I hold in my hand, as far as relates to the mere interchange 
of manufactures, that the manufactures exported to Ireland from Great 
Britain, in 1797, very little exceeded one million sterling (the articles of 
produce amount to nearly the same sum) ; whilst Great Britain, on the 
other hand, imported from Ireland to the amount of more than three 
millions in the manufacture of linen and linen yarn, and between two 
and three millions in provision and cattle, besides corn and other articles 
of produce." 

That, said Mr. Pitt, was in 1785 — ^three years after her legis- 
lative independence — that was the state of Ireland. Have you 
heard, gentlemen, that picture, that description ? You have 
heard that proof of the prosperity of Ireland. She then im- 
ported little more than one million's worth of Enghsh manu- 
facture; she exported two and a half millions of Hnen and 
Hnen yarn, and adding to that the milHon of other exports, 
there is a picture given of her internal prosperity, EecoUect 
that we now import largely English manufactures, and that 
the greatest part of the price of those manufactures consists 
of the wages which the manufacturer gives to the persons who 
manufacture them. Two milHon five hundred thousand worth 
of hnen and yarn were exported, and one miUion of other 
goods. Compare that with the present state of things. Does 
not every one of you know that there is scarcely anything now 



226 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

manufactured in Ireland — that nearly all the manufactures 
used m Ireland are imported from England ? I am now show- 
ing the state of Irish prosperity at the time I am talking of. 
I gave ypu the authority of Forster (no small one) and of Pitt, 
of Irish prosperity during that time. I will give you the au- 
thority of another man, that was not very friendly to the peo- 
ple of this country — that of Lord Clare. Lord Clare made a 
speech in 1798, which he subsequently published, and in which 
I find this remarkable passage, to which I beg leave to direct 
your particular attention : "There is not," said his lordship, " a 
nation on the face of the habitable globe, which has advanced 
in civHization, in agriculture, in manufactures, with the same 
rapidity, in the same period, as Ireland " (viz., from 1782 to 
1798). That was the way in which Irish legislative indepen- 
dence worked, and I have in support of it the evidence of Pitt, 
Foster, and Lord Clare : and Lord Grey, in 1799, talking of 
Scotland in the same years, says : 

"In truth, for a period of more than forty years after the (Scotch) 
Union, Scotland exhibited no proofs of increased industry and rising 
wealth." 

Lord Grey, in continuation, stated that — 

" Till after 1748, there was no sensible advance of the commerce of 
Scotland. Several of her manufactures were not established till 60 years 
after the Union, and her principal branch of manufacture was not set 
up, I beheve, till 1781. The aboUtion of the heritable jurisdictions was 
the first great measure that gave an impulse to the spirit of improvement 
in Scotland. Since that time the prosperity of Scotland has been con- 
siderable, but certainly not so great as that of Ireland has been within 
the same period." 

Lord Plunket, in his speech in 1799, in one of his happiest 
efforts of oratory, speaks of her as 

* a little island with a population of four or five mUHons of peo- 
ple, hardy, gallant, and enthusiastic — possessed of all the means of civili- 
zation, agriculture, and commerce, well pursued and underatood ; a con- 
stitution fuUy recognized and established ; her revenues, her trade, her 
manufactm-es thriving beyond the hope or the example of any other 
counti-y of her extent — witliin these few years advancing with a rapidity 
astonishing even to herself ; not complaining of deficiency in these res- 
pects, but enjoying and acknowledging her prosperity. She is called on 



SPEECH m HIS OWN DEFENCE. 227 

to surrender them all to tlie control of — wliom ? Is it to a great and 
powerful continent, to Tvliom nature intended her as an appendage — to a 
mighty people, totally exceeding her in all calculation of territory or 
population ? No ! but to another happy little island, placed beside her 
in the bosom of the Atlantic, of Httle more than double her territoiy 
and population, and possessing resources not nearly so superior to her 
wants." 

Here is the evidence of its failure as regards advantages to 
Ireland, and the benej&t to be derived from Irish legislative 
independence : 

" Such is the right honorable gentleman's (Mr. Pitt's) infelicity upon 
this great question, that the measure which was to be the remedy becomes 
the source of all distempers. Instead of quieting, he has agitated every 
heart in that countiy. The epoch from which was to begin the reign 
of comfort and confidence, of peace, and equity, and justice, is marked, 
even on its outset, by the establishment of that which rests every civil 
blessing on the caprice of power. Ill-starred race ! to whom this vaunted 
Union was to be the harbinger of all happiness, and of which the first 
fruit is martial law — or in other words, the extinguishment of all law 
whatsoever." 

Advantages to be expected from the independence of Ireland. 

17th May, 1782. 
"He desired gentlemen to look forward to that happy period when 
Ireland should experience the blessings that attend freedom of trade 
and constitution ; when by the richness and fertiUty of her soil, the in- 
dustry of her manufactures, and the increase of her population she 
should become a powerful country ; then might England look for power- 
ful assistance in seamen to man her fleets, and soldiers to fight her bat- 
tles. England renouncing all right to legislate for Ireland, the latter 
would most cordially support the former as a friend whom she loved. 
If this country, on the other hand, was to assume the power of making 
laws for Ireland, she must only make an enemy instead of a friend, for 
where there was not a community of interests, there the party whose 
interests were sacrificed became an enemy." — 2 vol. p. 60. 

Lord Chief Justice. — I beg your pardon, Mr. O'Connell, 
I am not able to bear the heat of the court. I would be sorry 
to incommode you, but it will be necessary to open one of the 
windows. 

Mr. O'Connell. — Not at all, my lord. I will retm-n in a 
moment. 



228 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONKELL. 

Mr. O'Connell having been permitted to withdraw for a 
short time, the court and jury retired for refreshment. 

The court having resumed, Mr. O'Connell thus proceeded : 
"When the adjournment took place I was in the act of reading 
to you several authorities showing how much Ireland pros- 
pered under her own independent parHament. I will now 
dkect your attention to such documents as will tend to cor- 
roborate the facts contained in those I have already adverted 
to. You have heard that in 1810 a meeting was held in Dub- 
lin to petition the legislature for a Eepeal of the Union. I 
will read an unconnected passage from a speech dehvered by a 
gentleman belonging to a most respectable house in this city. 
It is as foUows : 

"Some of us," said he, "remember tliis country as slie was before we 
recovered and brought back our constitution in the year 1782. We are 
reminded of it by the present period. Then as now, our merchants were 
without trade, our shopkeepers without customers, our workmen without 
employment ; then as now, it became the universal f eehng that nothing 
but the recovery of our rights could save us. Our rights were recovered ; 
and how soon afterwards, indeed as if by magic, plenty smiled on us, 
and we soon became prosperous and happy." 

Let me next adduce the testimony of a class of citizens 
who, from their position, and the nature of their avocations, 
were well calculated to supply important evidence on the state 
of Ireland, subsequent to the glorious achievements of 1782. 
The bankers of Dublin held a meeting on the 18th of Decem- 
ber, 1798, at which they passed the following resolutions : 

^^ Resolved — That since the renunciation of the power of Great Britain, 
in 1782, to legislate for Ii-eland, the commerce and prosperity of this 
kingdom have eminently increased. 

"Resolved — That we attribute these blessings, under Providence, to the 
wisdom of the Irish parhament." 

The Guild of Merchants met on the 14th of Januaiy, 1799, 
and passed a resolution declaring : 

"That the commerce of Ireland has increased and her manufactures 
improved beyond example, since the independence of this kingdom was 
restored by the exertions of our countrymen in 1782. 

" Resolved — That we look with abhorrence on any attempt to deprive 
the people of Ireland of their parliament, and thereby of their consti- 
tutional right and immediate power to legislate for themselves." 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 229 

I have in addition to these, from the most unquestionable 
authority (an authority incapable of deceiving or of being de- 
ceived), the relative increase in England and Ireland of the 
consumption of tea, tobacco, wine, sugar, and coffee, from 1785 
to the Union, which is as follows : 

Tea. — Increase in Ireland, 84 per cent ; increase in England, 45 per 
cent. 

From 1786 to the Union : Tobacco. — Increase in Ireland, 100 per cent ; 
increase in England, 64 per cent. 

From 1787 to the Union : Wine. — Increase in Ireland, 74 per cent ; 
increase in England, 22 per cent. 

From 1785 to the Union : Sugar. — ^Increase in Ireland, 57 ;^r cent ; 
increase in England, 53 per cent. 

Coffee. — Increase in Ireland, 600 per cent ; increase in England, 75 per 
cent. 

I could multiply quotations. What need have I for so do- 
ing ? I have proved that no country on the face of the earth 
ever increased so rapidly in prosperity, as Ireland did from 
1782 to the Union. There is a cant phrase used for want of 
argument against us Repealers — "you wish for dismember- 
ment of the empire." Reflect for one moment on the absurdity 
of saying this. Ireland, under her own parliament, with her 
own legislature, increased in prosperity to the incalculable ex- 
tent I have shown. Is it possible to beheve that that increase 
in prosperity would have had the least tendency to the dismem- 
berment of the empire, or separation from England ? She 
was increasing in prosperity during the connexion — she was 
increasing in prosperity during that period of legislative inde- 
pendence — why should she, then, think of dismemberment ? 
I can understand the term as applied to a period in which 
trade was declining — in which the consumption of the articles 
I have mentioned greatly diminished — ^I * can understand the 
term dismemberment, as applied to poverty and destitution, 
but it is absurd to talk about dismemberment, as apphcable to 
a period when there was an increase in prosperity, such as 
Ireland experienced under her own parKament again. 

Is it not melancholy to think that such an opening scene 
as that to which I have directed your attention should be 
closed at once? It really afflicts me to reflect that there 



230 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL, 

sliould have existed — should I call him a monster — to disturb 
such increasing prosperity, to gain dominion, and actually, to 
use the words of Charles K. Bushe, " invoice the prosperity 
of Ireland." At the time when the great change took place 
the governing principle was anything but what it should be. 
The state Enghsh debt was considerably increased — the des- 
truction of the Irish parliament, and the means used to effect 
that destruction, were certainly those suited to the nature of 
so deleterious an object. You will find that all that the worst 
passions could effectuate was arranged, in order to effect the 
destruction of Ireland. 

The Attorney-General has referred you to the report of the 
select committee of the House of Commons in 1797. I will 
refer you to that of 1798. There I find that that which was 
stated by Lord Plunket as to the fomenting of the rebeUion 
until it should come to such a pitch that it might suddenly 
explode was the great means of bringing the bad passions of 
Ireland in play. It appears by that report that there was a 
person of the nama^ of M'Guane, who was a colonel in the 
United Irishmen. He transmitted to government all meetings 
of the colonels, and of the country and provincial rebel com- 
mittees, from April, 1797, till May, 1798. These communica- 
tions were made through Mr. Clellann, land agent to Lord Lon- 
donderry. But while on this point I wiU direct your attention 
to another fact. In the Life of Grattan, vol. 2, p. 145 : 

"Shortly before Ms death Lord Clonmel sent for his nephew, Dean 
Scott, got him to examine his papers, and destroy those which were use- 
less. There were many relating to poUtics that disclosed the conduct of 
the Irish government at the period of the disturbances in 1798. There 
was one letter in particular which showed their duplicity, and that they 
might have crushed the rebellion ; but that they let it go on, on pur- 
pose, to carry the Union, and that this was their design. When Lord 
Clonmel was dying, he stated this to Dean Scott, and made him destroy 
the letter ; he further added that he had gone to the Lord Lieutenant, 
and told him that as they knew of the proceedings of the disaffected, it 
•was wrong to permit them to go on ; that the government, having it in 
their power, should crush them at once, and prevent the insurrection. 
He was coldly received, and found that his advice was not relished." 

So hero you have that which necessarily followed from not 
acting on the communication of M'Guane, and the fomenting 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 231 

of the rebellion for the purpose of carrying the Union. The 
entire country were against the measure, but they were con- 
trolled and checked by mihtary power. Lord Plunket says : 

"I accuse the government of fomenting the embers of a lingering re- 
bellion ; of hallooing the Protestant against the Catholic, and the Catholic 
against tlie Protestant ; of artfully keeping alive domestic dissensions 
for the purposes of subjugation." 

I will now read a passage from a speech made by Lord 
Grey, in the year 1800, on the repugnance of the Lrish nation 
to the Union : 

" Twenty-seven counties have petitioned against the measure. The pe- 
tition from the county of Down is signed by upward of 17,000 respect- 
able independent men, and all the others are in a similar proportion. 
Dublin petitioned under the great seal of the city, and each of the cor- 
porations in it followed the example. Drogheda petitioned against the 
Union ; and almost every town in the kingdom, in like manner, testified 
its disapprobation. Those in favor of the measure professing great in- 
fluence in the country, obtained a few counter petitions. Yet, though 
the petition from the county Down was signed by 17,000, the counter 
petition was signed only by 415. Though there were 707,000 who had 
signed petitions against the measure, the total number of those who 
declared themselves in favor of it did not exceed 3,000, and many of 
these only prayed that the measure might be discussed. If the facts 
I state are true (and I challenge any man to falsify them,) could a na- 
tion in more direct terms express its disapprobation of a pohtical measure 
than Ireland has done of a legislative Union with Great Britain ? In 
fact, the nation is nearly unanimous, and this great majority is composed, 
not of bigots, fanatics, or jacobins, but of the most respectable of every 
class in the community." 

Mr. Bushe says : 

"The basest corruption and artifice were excited to promote the 
Union. All the worst passions of the human heart were entered in the 
service, and all the most depraved ingenuity of the human intellect 
tortured to devise new contrivances for fraud. 

*' Half a million or more were expended some years since to break an 
opposition — the same, or greater sum, may be necessary now ; " [and 
Grattan added] "that Lord Castlereagh had said so in the most exten- 
sive sense of bribery and corruption. The threat was proceeded on — 
the peerage sold — the caitiffs of corruption were everywhere — in the 
lobby, in the streets, on the steps, and at the door of every parliamentary 
leader, offering titles to some, ojGSces to others, corruption to all." 



232 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

Let me now request your attention to a description given by 
Plunket of tlie mode in wliich the Union was carried : 

" I will be bold to say that licentious and impious France, in all the 
unrestrained excesses which anarchy and atheism have given birth to, 
has not committed a more insidious act against her enemy than is now 
attempted by the professed champion of the cause of civilized Europe 
against a friend and ally in the hour of her calamity and distress — at a 
moment when our country is filled with British troops, when the loyal 
men of Ireland are fatigued and exhausted by their efforts to subdue the 
rebellion — efforts in which they had succeeded before those troops ar- 
rived — while the habeas corpus act was suspended — while trials by court- 
martial are carrying on in many parts of the kingdom — while the j)eople 
are taught to think they have no right to meet or to dehberate — and 
while the great body of them are so palsied by their feai's or worn down 
by their exertions, that even the vital question is scarcely able to rouse 
them from their lethargy — in a moment when we are distracted by do- 
mestic dissensions — dissensions artfully kej)t alive as the pretext of our 
present subjugation, and the instrument of our future thralldom." 

Such, gentlemen, is the description given of the means by 
which the Union was carried. You know how much money 
■was spent in the purchase of rotten boroughs. You know 
that three millions were expended in the actual payment of 
persons who voted for the Union. You know that there was 
no office in the state, no office from the highest in the church 
to the lowest in the constabulary, that was not used to gain 
the desu'ed purpose. There was more fraud, corruption, and 
iniquity employed in the carrying of the Union, than perhaps 
ever accompanied any pubhc transaction. You wiU easily 
imagine the result. The Union has been destructive to Ire- 
land ; you feel this yourselves ; you see it by the state of your 
streets ; you know it by the position of yoiu' commerce. Hav- 
ing shown you the general spirit of the Enghsh government 
— having adverted to the finahty as intended by the treaty of 
1782 — having shown you the extreme advantages and pros- 
perity of Ireland from the independence of her own parhament 
— having shown you the means by which the Union was car- 
ried, I come now to detain you for as short a time as possible 
by a reference to the evil results of that measure. In the year 
1794: the Irish debt was only seven milHons ; in the year 1798 
it had increased to fourteen millions. At the last-named 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 233 

period, the English debt was, at least, X350,000,000. At the 
time of the Union, Ireland owed 21 millions — England 446 
millions. What were the terms of the Union ? They were 
these — that England was to bear forever the burden of these 
446 milhons, and consequently, for its interest and charge, the 
burden of a separate taxation of seventeen milhons annually, 
and that Ireland was not to be charged with that 446 millions 
at all for its principal or interest. But were these conditions 
comphed with? No ; of course they were not, and Ireland 
now owes every penny of that stupendous sum. You are 
charged with every farthing of it ; and, notwithstanding all 
the distinct promises of Castlereagh, the lands, the properties, 
the labors, the industry of the Irish people — all, all are hable 
to be mortgaged for the debt. 

That you may have some idea of the mismanagement as to 
finances, and that you may know how much has been done to 
accumulate the Irish debt and to reheve England's, I refer 
you to the finance report of the public expenditure. Recollect 
that the Irish parhament had an interest in keeping the peo- 
ple of Ireland out of debt ; recollect that England owed 446 
millions, and that Ireland owed 21 millions. The Irish par- 
hament has been often assailed, but could there have been a 
more protective parliament, one that would tend to keep the 
country more free from debt ? The Enghsli parhament were 
throwing away money ; the Irish parliament were thrifty and 
economical, keeping down the public debt. In 1822, Sir John 
Newport remonstrated. He says : 

"Ever since the Union, the imperial parliament had labored to raise 
the scale of taxation in Ireland as high as it was in England, and only 
relinquished the attempt when they found it was wholly unproductive. 
For twelve years he had remonstrated against this scheme, and had 
foreseen the evils resulting from it of a beggared gentry and a ruined 
peasantry. Ireland had four milhons of nominally increased taxes, 
while the whole failed as a system of revenue, and the people were 
burdened without any rehef to the treasury. It would be found, as it 
was in some countries, that the iron grasp of poverty had paralyzed the 
arm of the tax-gatherer, and hmited in this instance the omnipotence of 
parhament. They had taxed the people, but not augmented the sup- 
pHes ; they had drawn on capital — not income ; and they, in conse- 
quence, reaped the harvest of discontent, and failed to reap the harvest 
of revenue." 



234 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

Lord Lausdowne, also, in making a motion on the state of 
Ireland in the same year, said : 

" The revenue in 1807 amounted to £4,378,241. That between that 
year and 1815, additional taxes had been imposed, "which were estimated 
to produce £3,376,000 ; and that so far from an increase to the revenue 
having been the result, there was a great decUne — the revenue in 1821 
having been only £3,844,889, or £533,000 under the amount before the 
imposition of the three millions and a half of new taxes. He had, on a 
former occasion, stated it to be his oj)inion that the repeal of the taxes in 
Ireland would tend mainly to the revival of manufactures in that coun- 
try, and bringing it into a prosperous condition. It was objected to him 
on that occasion, that he sought, by giving large and exclusive advan- 
tages to Ii'eland, to raise her up into a manufacturing country, which 
should make her the rival of England and Scotland. While he dis- 
claimed any such intention, he feared Ireland was far indeed from any 
such prosperity. — Hansard, vol. xi., page 659. 

GENEKAIi ABSTKACT OF TAXES EEPEALED OK KEMTrTED SINCE 1800. 
GEEAT BKITAIN. lEEIiAND. 

Customs £7,929,567 £635,200 

Excise, 14,093,638 368,530 

Stamps 443,634 152,609 

Post Office 130,000 13,193 

Property Duty. . 14,617,823 

Windows 1,577,773 179,403 

House 250,000 53,673 Heai-th. 

Servants 472,061 42,988 

Carriages 391,796 71,086 

Horses 1,172,034 67,524 

Dogs 6,876 



£41,085,202 £1,584,211 

The taxes repealed or remitted in Ireland being one twenty-sixth part 
of those repealed in Great Britain." 

From Finance Report of Pubhc Expenditure, 1815 : 

"That for several years Ireland has advanced in permanent taxation 
more rapidly than Great Britain itself, notwithstanding the immense exer- 
tions of the latter country, including the extraordinary and war taxes, the 
permanent revenue of Great Britain having increased from the year 1801 
to the proportion of 16V to 10 ; the whole revenue of Great Britain, includ- 
ing war taxes, as 21i to 10 ; and the revenues of Ii'eland in the proportion of 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 235 

23 to 10. But in the twenty-four years referred to your committee, the 
increase of Irish revenue has been in the proportion of 461 to 10 !" — 
Session 1814-15, vol. vi. 

" The annual amount of taxes repealed in England since the peace is 
£47,214,338, and the amount of taxes repealed in Ireland in the same 
period is £1,575,940, the taxes repealed or remitted in Ireland being 
one thirtieth of those remitted or repealed in Great Britain. Here is 
another table, composed of the same materials, and coming out of the 
same shop, makes the quantity repealed in England only £41,085,202, 
but it leaves the quantity repealed in Ireland the same number as men- 
tioned above, or a Uttle more — it makes it £1,584,211," 

Gentlemen, would that occur in an Irish parliament? If he 
was accused of making Ireland what she ought to be in com- 
merce and manufactures, would he have disclaimed any such 
intention ? And what must have been that spirit of parha- 
ment toward Ireland, which made it necessary for a statesman 
to disclaim anything so atrocious, so outrageous, and so 
abominable, as the intention of making Ireland the rival of 
England and Scotland ? You perceive from this the fatuity 
and folly of transferring the management of your affairs to a 
parhament wherein it was considered a reproach to make Ire- 
land the equal of those countries, and how it is the imperative 
duty of every man who takes a part in politics to come for- 
ward and have a legislature which will not consider it a re- 
proach but a praise to endeavor to make Ireland the rival of 
every country in commerce and manufactures. This fact 
speaks trumpet-tongued, and with a voice that, I trust, will 
rouse you to just indignation against any attempt that may be 
made to put down the natural uprising — the peaceable and 
tranquil uprising — of the entire Irish people to obtain the 
benefit of a native parhament. There is a document here, 
which I cannot avoid quoting for you : 

" The enormous excess of British over Irish debt at the Union left 
the British minister no excuse for their consoHdation, aud accordingly 
it -was arranged that the two debts should continue to be separately 
provided for. The active expenditure of the empire (i. e., the expen- 
diture clear of chai'ge of debts) was to be provided for in the propor- 
tion of two parts from Ireland to fifteen from Great Britain. These 
proportions were to cease, the debts were to be consolidated, and the 
two countries to contribute indiscriminately by equal taxes so soon as 



236 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

the said respective debts should be brought to bear to each other the 
proportions of the contributions, viz., as 2 to 15 ; provided, also, that the 
fiscal ability of Ireland should be found to have increased. Now, the 
2 to 15 rate of contribution -was denounced at the time by Iiishmen as 
too high for Ireland, and afterwards so admitted by the British min- 
isters themselves. Its consequence was to exhaust and impoverish her 
to such a degree, that her debt in sixteen years increased 230 per cent., 
Avhile the British only increased 66 per cent. This disproportionate 
and unjust increase of the Irish debt brought about the 2 to 15 propor- 
tion between it and the British debt.." 

It is deliglitful to me to have an opportunity of stating these 
facts in a place from which I know they will be extensively 
circulated. 

"Advantage was taken of that single branch of the contingency con- 
templated in the Union Act, although the other branch of the contin- 
gency — viz., the increase of Ireland's ability, had not only occurred, but 
by the confession of the English ministers themselves, in 1816, the very 
contrary had occurred — namely, Ireland had become poorer than before. 
Advantage, we say, was taken of that single branch of the contingency 
to consolidate the debts, to do away with all measure of proportionate 
contribution, and place the purse of Ireland, without restriction or limit, 
in the hands of the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, thenceforward 
to take from it, and apply as he liked, every penny it did then and 
might at any farther time contain, and rob Ireland of all chance of bene- 
fit from any surplus of revenue thenceforward and forever." 

Here we find that England was increasing the taxation of 
Ireland at the rate of X4,000,000 per annum, and such was the 
state of Ireland, that instead of this new taxation producing one 
sixpence of revenue, the actual precedent revenue fell £500,000 
in the ensuing year. The debt of Ireland increased 230 per 
cent., while that of England increased only 60 per cent. Can 
it be possible that any one will say that that increase was 
necessary. What prosperity can you have under such a state 
of things ? The moment you have any prosperity it will be 
converted into English revenue. The moment you are able to 
bear a new tax, it will be used not only to pay off your own debt, 
but to maintain increased Enghsh expenditure. "Was there 
ever anything which required greater vigilance than the pecu- 
niary management of the country ? I have given you the 
most galhng instances of the abuse of the f)ower of misman- 
agement. I have given those instances from what, if they 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 237 

were not parKamentary documents, you would hesitate to 
credit the amount of robbery so open, plunder so obvious and 
so extensive, the accumulation of debt so entirely inconsistent 
with the supposed details of the Union — so inconsistent with 
all that could occur under anything hke proper manage- 
ment. 

You, gentlemen, are famihar in private Hfe, with the evil 
effects resulting from giving to others, even the most disinter- 
ested persons, the management of your concorns; and it is 
with nations as with individuals. But then, you may be told 
that when the peace came, there was a relaxation and a dimin- 
ution in the taxation. I will tell you what there has been — 
there has been a diminution of taxation in England of X4:l,085,- 
202, but in Ireland, the diminution has been only Xl,584:,211 ; 
that is in the proportion of l^ to 40. That is the way the 
Enghsh strike off taxes for themselves ; that is the way they 
diminished our taxation. There is another bitter ingredient 
in our cup, that the taxation which, up to 1836, was in Irish 
currency, was then converted at once into British currency, 
and by that operation one-thirtieth was added to our taxation. 
As mercantile men, interested in the prosperity of our country, 
I ask you, is it possible that there can be prosperity while the 
management of your concerns are in their power ? Your re- 
laxation from taxation depends on their will and mercy. Had 
you an Irish parliament, they would insist on the accounts be- 
ing fairly taken. They would pay every penny that Ireland 
owes, but no more. Can you then, by any verdict, stand be- 
tween your countrymen and the obtaining of this justice from 
England? I have shown you what have been the financial 
effects of this miscalled Union. 

I shall now read a document of great importance, as to the 
means by which the Union was carried. It is the protest of 
nineteen Irish peers against the Union. 

[Here the honorable and learned gentleman read a protest, 
which was signed Leinster, Meath, and several others of the peers 
of Ii'eland.] 

This, gentlemen, is the authentic declaration of the Irish 
peerage, in reference to the atrocity committed against this 



238 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

country, by the carrying of the act of Union. I am sure there 
is not one of their descendants who does not glory that his an- 
cestor signed that protest, and I trust we will soon have an 
opportunity of seeing those descendants carrying the inten- 
tions of their ancestors into effect, and taking their seats in a 
parhament in College Green. Among other evils resulting 
from the Union, is the inadequacy of the representation of Ire- 
land, as contrasted with that of England, and in particular the 
infinitely less voice of the people of Ireland, by reason of the 
inadequacy of the register. Gentlemen, the following extract, 
which is of some length, but great importance, will tend to 
show the injustice done to Ireland in the nominal Union, by 
giving something like an adequate proportion of representa- 
tives to England, but denying to Ireland a similar advantage. 
I am anxious to read this now, and cast it before the public, 
because there appears to be something like a disposition to 
concede something on this point. Last year we were told 
there was a termination to concession. This year we are told 
that something will be done in the extension of the parhament- 
ary franchise. You will see how necessary this is : 

"The result of the injustice done to the people of Ireland by the re- 
striction of the elective franchise is made manifest by a contrast between 
the population of the several counties of England, and the number of 
registered voters therein, with the population and number of regis- 
tered voters of the different Irish counties. "We take our statement 
of numbers from the parliamentry papers, and by comparing the least 
populous counties in England with the most populous in Ireland — Wes t- 
moreland and Cork, for instance — we find the following result : The ru- 
ral population of Westmoreland is 43,464, and its number of registered 
voters after the Eeform Act, amounted to 4,392. Nearly one out of every 
ten inhabitants. Whereas, in the county of Cork the population is 
703,716, and the number of electors registered after the Irish Reform Act, 
was only 3,835, being scarcely one out of every two hundred of the in- 
habitants. 

" We ask, therefore, is this to be endured ? 

' ' I may now mention the effect in particular locaUties. In Wales the 
population is 800,000 — in Cork the rural population is 713,710. How are 
they respectively represented in parhament ? Wales, with 800,000 in- 
habitants, has 28 members of parhament; the county Cork, with nearly the 
same population, has but two members of parliament ; the county Mayo, 
with 400,000 inhabitants, has but two members of parliament ; Wale3, 
with 800,000 inhabitants — only double the number — has 28 members of 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 239 

parliament. The people of Ireland don't know tliese things, but I will 
take care they shaU know it ; and I anticipate easily the result. I will 
just give another specimen — I will take five counties in each country to 
show you how the representation stands. Cumberland, with a popula- 
tion of 126,681, has four members ; the county of Cork, with a popula- 
tion of 713,716, has but two members. Leicestershire, with a population 
of 197,276, has four members. Tipperary, with a population of 390,598 
has but two members. NorthamiDton, with a population of 179,276, has 
four members. The county of Down, with population of 338,571, has 
but two members. Worcestershire, with a population of 211,356, has 
four members. The county of Galway, with a population of 381,407, has 
but two members, Wiltshire, with a population of 239,181, has four 
members. Tyrone, with a population of 302,945, has but two members. 
That is to say — five English counties, with a population of less than a 
million — that is, with a population amounting to 953,770 — have twenty 
members ; and five Irish counties, with a population of 2,116,167 persons, 
have only ten representatives. Now let me show you the number of 
electors in six counties. Westmoreland, with a rural population of 43,- 
464, has 4,392 registered electors. Cork, with a rural poiJulation of 713,- 
716, has 3,835 registered electors. Bedford, with a rural population of 88,- 
524, has 3,966 registered electors. Antrim, with a rural population of 
316,909, has 3,487 registered electors. Hertford, with a rural population 
of 95,977, has 5,031 registered electors. Galway, with a rural popula- 
lation of 381,564, has 3,061 registered electors. 

" Here is Westmoreland, with less than one fourteenth of the popu- 
lation of Cork, and yet it has an absolute majority of 557 registered 
voters. Is this to be called reform ? 

"Again, take the county of Bedford, with a rural population of 88,- 
424 inhabitants ; its registered voters under the Eeform Act were 3,966, 
whUe Antrim, with a population of 316,909, had only 3,487 registered 
voters — that is, Bedford had an absolute majority of near 500 voters 
over Antrim, notwithstanding the enormous disproportion in the number 
of its inhabitants. 

"Hertford, with a population of 95,977 inhabitants, had 5,013 regis- 
tered voters, while Galway, with 381,564 inhabitants, had only 3,061 
voters." 

" Eutlandshire, the smallest county in England, with only 19,385 in- 
habitants, had 1,296 votes, while Longford, with 112,558 inhabitants, had 
only 1,294, absolutely two less than Eutlandshire. 

"Again, Huntingdon, with a population of 47,799 inhabitants, had 
2,647 voters, while Donegal, with a population of 289,149, had only 
1,448 voters ; and Limerick, one of the wealthiest counties in Ireland, 
with an opulent agricultural population 248,801 inhabitants, had only 
2,565 electors. 

"Nay, even the Isle of Wight, with only 28,731 inhabitants, had 1,167 
voters, while Mayo, with 366,328 inhabitants, had only 1,350 voters, and 



240 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

Protestant Tyrone, with a population of 310,000 inhabitants, had only 
1,151 electors, absolutely 16 voters less than the Isle of Wight. 

" The Island of Anglesea also, mth a population of only 33,508 inhab- 
itants, had 1,187 voters ; while Kildare, with 108,424 inhabitants, had 
only 1,112 voters ; and Kerry, with 265,126 inhabitants, had only 1,161 
voters, just 26 voters less than Anglesea, and 6 less than the Isle of 
Wight. 

"Even if we compare the largest counties in both countries. York- 
shire, with an agricultural population of 913,738 inhabitants, and Cork, 
with a population of 703,716, we find that the Enghsh county had 33,- 
154 electors, while the Irish one had only 3,385. 

"We find, therefore, that England, in her rural population of 8,336,- 
000 inhabitants, had 344,564 county voters, while Ireland, in a similar 
proportion of 7,027,509 inhabitants, had only 60,607 registered electors. 

" The consequence of all these defects in the Irish Reform Act is, that 
the disproportion between the number of electors in English and Irish 
cities and buroughs, when compared to the relative population, is as 
great as in the counties. For we find from the same returns that, after 
the Eeform Act, Exeter, with a population of 27,932 inhabitants, had 
3,426 voters — Hull, with 46,746 inhabitants, had 4,275 electors — while 
Waterford, with a population of 28,821 inhabitants, had only 1,278 elec- 
tors, being in the ratio of 3 to 1. 

"Again, comparing the largest cities and boroughs in Ireland, with 
the smaller ones in England, we find the following results : 

" Worcester, with a population of 27,313 inhabitants, has 2,608 voters, 
while Limerick, with a population of 66,554 inhabitants, has only 2,850 
electors. 

" Chester, with only 21,363 inhabitants, has no less than 2,231 voters, 
while Belfast, the wealthiest and most commercial city in Ireland, with 
53,000 inhabitants, had only 1,926 electors. 

" The city of Cork, with 110,000 inhabitants, had only 3,650 electors, 
including the non-resident freemen, while Newcastle-upon-Tyne, with a 
population of 42,260 inhabitants, had 4,952 voters. Preston, with a 
population of 33,112 inhabitants, had 4,204 electors — both of them more 
than Cork, which last city has more than treble the number of inhabit- 
ants, of either of the other two ; and Bristol, with 104,338 inhabitants, not 
equal to the population of Cork, has 10,347 voters, being three times the 
constituency of the Irish city. 

"If, too, we compare the smaller boroughs in both countries together, 
we find that those which barely escaped schedule A, with populations 
varying from 2 to 3,000 inLabitants, have more electors than the bo- 
roughs in Ireland, retained by the act of Union, with from 10 to 12,000 
inhabitants. 

"For example, Wallinford, Launcestown, Wareham, Arundel, have all 
under 3,000 inhabitants, while the electoral constituencies in all exceed 
300 voters. However, in Athlone and Bandon, with over ten thousand 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 241 

inhabitants in each, the votes do not exceed 250, and in many others, 
such as Kinsale, Coleraine, and New Eoss, the available constituency falls 
short of 200 voters. 

"If, also, we compare the metropolitan constituencies of both coun- 
tries, where an equality in household value may be expected, we find 
that Dublin, with a population of 210,000 inhabitants, had only 9,081 
voters, including all the bad freemen lately manufactured by the corpor- 
ation, while the city of London, with a population of only 122,000 inhab- 
itants, had 18,584 electors, and only 17,315 houses above £10 value. 

"Nothing can more clearly illustrate the disadvantages under which 
the Irish cities labor, with respect to the £10 household franchise, than the 
compai'ison of the number of houses of £10 a year clear value in London, 
and the number of electors upon that quahfication, with the number of 
similar houses in DubHn, and of similar electors. These facts appear 
from the parhamentary returns. The number of £10 houses in the city 
of London is 17,315, and the number of electors ajppears to be 18,584 ; 
while in Dubhn, the number of houses of £10 value, according to Sher- 
rard's valuation, amounted to 14,105, while the number of electors only 
amount to 9,081. Thus, in the city of London, there are more electors 
than £10 householders, whereas, in the city of Dublin the aggregate of 
electors does not amount to within one third of the number of £10 
householders. 

" Wales compared with Ireland. — Wales has a population of 800,000. 
In Cork the rural population is 713,716. How are they respectively 
presented ? "Wales has twenty-eight members; Cork, with nearly the same 
j)opulation, has but two." 

Here is a parliamentary paper ; it was published in 1832, 
and tlie sessional number is 206. It states the relative 
amounts of the Enghsh, Scotch, Welsh, and Irish revenue in 
that year, and there is no similar paper of a later date that I 
am aware of. The Irish revenue was X4,392,000. The Welsh 
revenue was £348,000. 

This is the exhibition which there turn makes of what the 
honorable member considers the superior wealth of the princi- 
pality of Wales. That principality, in point of fact, falls be- 
low Ireland in any of those pretensions to representation 
founded upon wealth. I have looked into the amounts of the 
revenue collected in the single port of Cork, and they exceed 
that of the principahty of Wales. There are no annual 
records to be referred to in such a case, but I find that in one 
year the customs of Cork amounted to X263,000, and that in 
another year the excise amounted to £272,000. These amounts 



242 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

give, I believe, a fair average view of the revenues collected in 
the port of Cork, and their total is £535,000. The receipts of 
"Wales are only X548,000. Cork, then, is entitled to more 
members than the entire principality of Wales, on these very 
grounds on which Great Britain justifies her overwhelming 
numerical superiority in the House of Commons. If Wales 
have not a representation disproportioned to her wealth, Cork 
ought to return 43 members to parHament. 

This is the way Ireland has been defrauded in her fran- 
chise, her representation, and in every one of the details of 
the Union measure. But are there no other evil results from 
the Union? Is it not injurious in its consequences to your 
commerce, your agriculture, and youi* manufactures, to have a 
distant legislature? I had many particulars to lay before you, 
showing the state of different trades in Dublin, and how they 
had been injuriously affected by the total neglect of an Eng- 
lish parhament ; but I shall for the present take for example 
the coal trade. I have extracts from seven or eight volumes 
of the Reports of the Chamber of Commerce upon that trade, 
which I shall read to you. [The honorable and learned gen- 
tleman then read the passages and proceeded.] Why have I 
read these to you ? I will tell you. For eight years the mer- 
chants of Dubhn, the merchants of Ireland, complained of the 
hardship to their trade. The Tories were in office, and they 
were succeeded by the Whigs. This plain and palpable vio- 
lation of the act of Union was estabhshed, clearly proved, and 
yet there was no redress from Whig or Tory. At length the 
agitation for Eepeal commenced, the discussion of the ques- 
tion was coming on, and the Whigs put an end to the 
grievance ; and what they would not do in justice to the mer- 
cantile interests they did at length from a prudent and proper 
motive, and the articles of the Union were, in that respect, 
carried into effect, and the duties taken off coal. Gentlemen, 
I ask you, is it not a sad consequence of the Union, the enor- 
mous expense incurred in obtaining any private bill in London 
respecting property, railroads, or any other matter it may be 
necessary to obtain it for. There is the expense of going to 
London, the loss of time there, and the heavy cost of passing 
any such bill through a committee. What has lately hap- 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 243 

pened in your own neighborliood ? The Dublin and Droghe- 
da railway biU cost X28,000 before it was passed. If the par- 
hament was in Dublin, X1,000 would be more than it would 
be necessary to expend upon it, and I defy any man to carry 
a private bill there, particularly if there should be any opposi- 
tion to it, without a proportionate expense. Can. anything be 
more frightful than the expense of election committees? 
Every witness must be taken to England, and must be kept 
there, and if he should be sent back after his examination, or 
otherwise out of the way, you have a chance of losing your 
seat as well as all your expenses. Is it worthy thiit the entire 
of the expense should be circulated in London and not one 
farthing of it in Dublin, and not a single Irish lawyer 
receives even a sohtary fee out of it, while such vast sums 
are expended in the complicated machinery of bringing a pe- 
tition before a committee of the House of Commons in Lon- 
don? Every shilling goes into the pockets of the English 
barristers practising there. Gentlemen, the expenditure of 
public establishments in this country before the Union pro- 
duced a considerable mitigation of the taxation. What is now 
become of all those boards ? Where is the treasury board ? 
Transplanted to England. Where is the excise board ? Trans- 
ferred to England. The customs board ? Transferred to Eng- 
land. The stamp-office and others are greatly diminished, 
and progressing to extinction — even the Old Man's Hospital 
is extinct. Is this principle of centralization fair which pro- 
duces aU those advantages to England, and all this misery to 
Ireland? I shall now ask your attention to a statement of 
the number of EngHsh and Scotchmen appointed to offices of 
the state in Ireland. I take it from the Mail. Let me first 
observe that the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland is an English- 
man ; the Chief Secretary is an Englishman ; the Lord Chan- 
cellor is an Enghshman. The writer in the Mail proceeds, in 
answer to an article in the London Times relative to this 
topic of complaint : 

" The Archbisliop of Dublin is an EngKshman ; the chief administra- 
tor of the Irish Poor Law is an EngUshman ; the paymaster of Irish civil 
services is a Scotchman ; the chief commissioner of Irish pubhc works 
is an Englishman; the Teller of the Irish Exchequer is an English- 



244 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

man ; the cLief officer of the Irish constabulary is a Scotchman ; the 
chief officer of the Irish post-office is an Englishman ; the Collector of 
Excise is a Scotchman ; the head of the revenue police is an English- 
man ; the second in command is a Scotchman ; the persons employed in 
the collection of the customs are English and Scotch — in the proiiortion 
of thirty-five to one." 

"But the Times may perhaps observe — ' True ; but all this is only the 
elucidation of unbarring the gates of preferment, unsparingly and hon- 
estly. ' Scotchmen and Englishmen are placed in office in Ireland, and 
Irishmen, in return, in Scotland and England, in order to draw closer 
the bonds of union between the three united nations. 

"Again — let us see how facts actually stand. There are cabinet minis- 
ters — Englishmen, 10; Scotchmen, 3; Irishmen, 0. 

"The Duke of Wellington scarcely considers himself an Irishman, and 
certainly cannot be called a representative of Irish interests in the cabi- 
net. 

"Lordt of the Treasury — Englishmen 4, Scotchmen 1, Irishmen 1. 
Clerks of the Treasury — ^Englishmen and Scotchmen 112, Mr. Fitzgerald 
(query an Irishman ?) 1. Members of the Lord Steward's and Lord 
Chamberlain's Household — Englishmen and Scotchmen 225, Irishmen 4. 
British Ministers to Foreign Courts — EngUshmen and Scotchmen 131, 
Irishmen 4. Poor Law Commissioners — Englishmen 3, Irishmen 0." 
" We presume," adds the editor, " that these facts show that the natives 
of the three kingdoms are all placed upon an equal footing ! the chances 
of access to preferment to an Englishman or Scotchman in Ireland, being 
in the few instances that have occurred to us while writing, as 6 to ; 
while the probability of an Irishmen obtaining place in England, appears, 
from an analogous calculation, to be in proportion of 491 to 10, or 
as 1 to 50. He could easily swell, he adds, this list, were it neces- 
sary." 

I have read that to you to show the meaning of the phrase 
" Ireland for the Irish, and the Irish for Ireland." It is a per- 
fect fallacy, a delusion to assert that the Irish are indemnified 
by promotions or appointments in England for the loss of the 
appointments at home. The places in England and Scotland 
are few enough for Enghshmen and Scotchmen, and they give 
them the places in Ireland in addition. I proceed, gentlemen, 
to show you other evil results from the Union. I quote from 
Fox's remarks upon the state of the nation in 1807. The 
Union was atrocious in its principle and abominable in its 
means. It was a measure the most disgraceful to the govern- 
ment of the country that was ever carried or proposed. So 
far was he from thinking that Great Britain had a right to 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 245 

govern Ireland if she did not clioose to be governed by us, that 
he maintained that no country that ever had existed or did 
exist, had a right to hold the sovereignaty of another against 
the will and consent of that other. I have given abundance of 
proof from extracts I have read of the prosperity of Ireland 
under the fostering care of her own parliament; but I wil^ 
quote a little further. I will show by reference to parha-- 
mentary papers the decrease from 1800 to 1827, of consump- 
tion in Ireland, compared with the increase in England. I 
find the respective consumption of tea, coffee, sugar, tobacco 
and wine, from the time of the Union to the year 1827, to be 
stated in the following manner ; 

Tea, Increase in England 25 per cent. 

Increase in Ireland 24 " 

Coffee, Increase in England 1800 " 

Increase in Ireland 400 " 

Sugar, Increase in England 26 " 

Increase in Ireland 16 " 

Tobacco, Increase in England .27 " 

Decrease in Ireland 37 " 

Wine, Increase in England 24 " 

Decrease in Ireland 45 " 

DECREASE OP CONSUMPTION IN IRELAND FROM 1802 TO 1823, 
FROM TABLES PUBLISHED BY MR. HALLIDAY. 

mPOETED INTO rRELAND. 

lbs. 

Green Tea, .... 1802 *. 152,674 

1823 28,168 

Decrease, 114,506 lbs., or about fths. 

Port Wine, 1802 4,487 

1823 1,014 

Decrease, 3,473 tuns, or about |tli8. 

French Wines, . . 1802 454 tuns. 

1823 121 

Decrease, 333 tuns, or about fth* 

Those who defend the Union and advocate its continuance 
are in the habit of averring that our trade in the exportation 



24:6 SELECT SPEECHES OP DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

of cattle has greatly increased since the passage of that mea- 
sure, which in my mind has operated with a most disastrous 
influence on the fortunes of my country. But gentlemen, 
I hold in my hand a document which demonstrate to you that 
this is a delusion, and will make you clearly understand how 
the real facts of the case are. Our cattle export has dimin- 
ished by the Union. Hear how the facts really are. 

"The defenders of the Union ordinarily lay much stress on the in- 
creased export of cattle, sheep, and provisions, since that measure. 
This export, however, is from a starving people ; and being so, the argu- 
ment as to its great value to Ireland is not one to waste much time in 
considering. A curious fact has come out with reference to this subject. 
A return appeared in all the Dublin papers, last November, of the num- 
ber of sheep and horned cattle at the great fair at Ballinasloe, every 
year from 1790 to 1842. The following extracts from it, we put in the 
same table, with figures, from a parhamentary return of 1843, and the 
Irish Railway Report, showing the export of the articles mentioned in 
two of the years included. "We have no return of the export last year. 

1799.— Sheep, 77,900 ; exported, 800. Homed cattle, 9,900 ; exported 
14,000. 

1835.— Sheep, 62,400 ; exported, 125,000. Horned cattle, 8,500 ; ex- 
ported, 98,000. 

1842.— Sheep, 76,800; homed cattle, 14,300." 

The question naturally arises — what became of the 77,000 
surplus sheep in the first year as well as the sheep at other 
fairs ? They were eaten at home. 

" As to oxen, 14,000 went away in 1799, and 98,000 in 1835 ; yet if 
we test the product of all Ireland in the former year, by the most suffi- 
cient criterion of the amount at BaUinasloe fair, we shall find that Ire- 
land had then more for sale than in 1835, and consumed the greater part 
of her surplus over her export — exporting the remainder in the more 
valuable form of provisions. 

" The parliamentary documents quoted before enable us to show what 
the export of provisions was in the years 1799 and 1835 : — in the year 
1799 there were exported 14,000 cattle, 4,000 swine, and 278,000 barrels of 
beef and pork ; in 1835, 98,000 cattle, 76,000 swine, and 140,000 baiTels of 
beef and pork. There has then been since the Union a decrease of 
the more valuable export, viz., provisions — valuable because of the la- 
bor employed at home in their manufacture, and an increase of the less 
valuable, viz., the Uve animals — less valuable to a country as an article of 
export, by reason of the small quantity of employment which is given in 
the preparing of it. 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 247 

*' As the diminution of the number of barrels of beef and pork will not 
by any means account for the great increase of the live export — while the 
whole number of cattle produced in Ireland in 1835 was, at any rate, not 
greater than in 1799 — it follows that much of the excess of live export in 
1835 must have been by deduction from the number previously con- 
sumed at home, and therefore that the home consumption in the latter 
year was considerably loss than the year before the Union, notwithstand- 
ing the cent, per cent, increase of population." 

Gentlemen, you must bear in mind tliat the trade of cattle 
exportation is much more beneficial to the population of a 
country than made-up provisions. The increase in cattle ex- 
portation trade is indicative of a country's prosperity in a de- 
gree much more eminent than the increase in the provision 
trade. In fact, an increase in the latter branch of commerce 
is rather indicative of distress among the people. In the one 
case we have an evidence of prosperity, and in the other a 
clear proof of poverty and destitution. In 1833 Mr. Boyton 
gave us the advantage of a clear research upon this subject. 
Permit me to read it for you : 

' ' The exports and imports, as far as they are a test of a decay of pro- 
fitable occupation — so far as the exports and imports are supphed from 
the parUamentai'y retiu-ns — exhibit extraordinary evidences of the con- 
dition of the laboring classes. The importation of flaxseed, an evidence 
of the extent of the most important source of employment, was, in 1790, 
339,745 barrels ; 1800, 327,621 barrels ; 1830, 460,458 barrels. The im- 
portation of silk, raw and thrown, was, in 1790, 92,091 lbs.; 1800, 79,860 
lbs., 1830, 3,190 lbs. Of unwrought iron, in 1790, 2,271 tons; in 1800, 10,- 
241 tons ; in 1830, 871 tons. Formerly we spun all our own woolen and 
worsted yarn. We imported in 1790 only 2,294 lbs. ; in 1,800, 1860 lbs. ; iu 
1826, 662,750 lbs. — an enormous increase. There were, I understand, up- 
ward of thirty persons engaged in the woolen trade in DubUn, who have be- 
come bankrupts since 1821. There has been, doubtless, an increase in ex^ 
ports of cottons. The exports were— in 1800, 9,147 yards; 1826, 7,793,873. 
The exports of cotton from Great Britain were — in 1829, 402,517,196 
yards, value £12,516,247, which will give the value of our cotton exports 
at something less than a quarter of a milHon — poor substitute for our 
linens, which in the province of Ulster alone exceed in value two mil^ 
lions two hundred thousand pounds. In fact, every other return affords 
unequivocal proof that the main sources of occupation are decisively cut 
off from the main body of the population of this country. The export 
of live cattle and of corn has very greatly increased ; but these are raw 
materials ; there is httle more labor in the production of an ox than the 



248 SELECT SPEECHES OF DAISTIEL o'CONNELL. 

occupation of him -who herds and houses him ; his value is the rent of 
the land, the price of the grass that feeds him, -while an equal value oi 
cotton, or linen, or pottery, will require for its production the labor of 
many people for money. Thus the exports of the country now are some- 
what under the value of the exports thirty years since, but they employ 
nothing like the number of people for their production ; employment 
is immensely reduced : population increased three eighths. Thus, in this 
transition from the state of a manufacturing population to an agricultu- 
ral, a mass of misery, poverty, and discontent is created." 

By this statement you will see that the importation of yam 
increased, but that is no subject for fehcitation, inasmuch as 
that increase was obtained at the expense of a diminution in 
the home manufacture of the article. The next document to 
which I will take the liberty of directing your attention, is a 
report by Dr. Stack, in reference to the state of a valuable 
charitable institution in this city. It is an important docu- 
ment, as clearly evidencing the effects of the Union upon 
institutions of this kind : 

" The Sick Poor Institution, since its establishment in 1794, has shared 
in the sad reverses which the locality has undergone over which its op- 
erations extended. The Uberties of Dublin, once the seat of manufac- 
tures and of wealth, have degenerated into the habitation of the decayed or 
unemployed artisan ; the abode of fashion has now become proverbially 
the haunt of vice, and poverty, and of disease ; hence while the necessi- 
ty for such an institution as this has become every day more urgent, the 
supporters of it have proportionally diminished— as the objects of re- 
lief have increased its friends have decreased. In order at once to per- 
ceive this altered state of things, a mere inspection of the returns made 
at different periods is aU that is necessary. In 1798, patients, 3,640 — 
ncome, £1,035 17s. Id. ; 1841, patients, 6,159— income, £927 4s. lOd." 

Thus you will perceive that while the patients increased four 
fifths, the income of the institution has decreased in the pro- 
portion of three fourths. I have now to submit to your con- 
sideration some melancholy details illustrating the disastrous 
effects of the Union upon our national industry. The state- 
ment may be relied on as strictly authentic. [Here the 
learned gentlemen read the extract alluded to.] There is 
scarcely a trade in Dublin concerning which I could not, did 
I not fear to trespass at too great length upon your attention, 
give you details equally distressing ; for, alas, equally authentic 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 249 

details showing a daily decrease of employment, and a 
daily increase of misery and distress — showing liow men 
who were once opulent manufacturers are now reduced 
to absolute beggary — showing this fact, wliichis more elo- 
quent than a thousand arguments, that whereas before the 
Union, there were 68,000 operatives in Dublin, there are at 
present only 4,000. About a year since I made inquiries into 
the state of the Liberty, which has been well described to con- 
sist of one mass of ruins : and the following description was 
handed to me. [Here the learned gentlemen read the extract 
alluded to.] Need I dwell upon the evidences of ruined great- 
ness and fading prosperity which every moment meet your 
eye, as you walk through the streets of Dubhn ? Need I tell 
you how prosperity, happiness, and affluence, were once found 
to reside, where. nothing now can be found but misery, distress, 
and desolation'? I have a statistical statement of the decay of 
house property at hand, but I will not trouble you with a 
lengthened detail of it at this hour of the day. Take two or 
three of the leading mansions of the city, and mark to what 
they have been reduced. What has become of the house that 
was once the noble mansion of Lord Powerscourt's family ? 
It had been a stamp office ; it is now the counting-house of a 
respectable firm in the cotton, silk, and woolen trade. What 
has become of Lord Moira's house — that house which had 
once been the residence of the Plantagenets in this country ? 
Alas ! are you not weU aware that it is now the Mendicity ? 
And that magnificent edifice the Belvedere house, what sad 
reverses has it experienced ! It cost £28,000 in the building 
— the stairs alone cost £3,000, but the whole premises were the 
other day sold for a school to the Jesuits for eleven hundred 
pounds ; and are these melancholy spectacles day by day, and 
hour by hour, to be displayed before our eyes, and are we to 
make no effort to retrieve the fallen fortunes of our country ? 
Are the men who would restore her to her pristine prosperity 
to be menaced with a dungeon ? Are the men who endeavor 
to succor and defend her to be branded as malefactors and 
conspirators? It is to you, gentlemen, that I appeal for a 
solution of this proposition. I have estabhshed my position ; 
I have shown the prosperity of Ireland before the Union ; I 
have shown the advantages to be secured to Ireland by a res- 



250 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'COKNELL. 

toration of lier domestic parliament ; I have shown how man- 
ufacturers have been reduced to the condition of operatives, 
and operatives to the condition of mendicants, by the ruinous 
effects of that disastrous measure — all that have I shown and 
nothing more — and foi^ that I am to be persecuted and for 
that I am to be prosecuted as a conspirator ! I have shown 
you the results of the Union, and have I not displayed to your 
eyes a picture the contemplation of which renders it the duty 
of all honest and true hearted men to endeavor to remedy this 
state of things? That we are combined for Kepeal is our 
pride and boast ; but that we are combined together for any 
illegal or criminal purpose is an idea which, with scorn and 
indignation, we repudiate. Even before the Union was intro- 
duced, the moment there was an apprehension of its being 
introduced, coupled, as it was then said to be, with CathoHc 
emancipation, the Catholics of Dubhn held a meeting in Fran- 
cis-street, on the 9th of April, 1795, John Sweetman in the 
chair, at which they expressed their indignant refusal to ac- 
cept emancipation coupled with any Union measure. The 
first time I addressed a pubHc assembly was on the 13th of 
January, 1800. It was my maiden speech. Pray listen to the 
last passage in the speech, and you will find that the ruling 
principles of my entire pohtical life are all embodied in it, and 
that my views were anything, and are anything, but sectarian. 

[Mr. O'Connell then read the passage from his speech.] 

That was my first public declaration. In the sincerity of 
my soul I made that declaration — in the sincerity of my soul 
I made that offer. It might have been taken up ; there was a 
strong party in the country at that time highly unfavorable to 
the Roman Cathohc claims. But I risked it, and I repeat, 
in the sincerity of my soul, I made the declaration that I 
would prefer the re-enactment of the penal code, in all its hor- 
rors, rather than consent to the Union ; and I threw myself on 
the generosity of my fellow-countrymen, the Protestants of 
Ireland. Gentlemen, in 1810, you have already heard, the 
Kepeal was brought forward, and pubhc meetings were held 
in the city of Dublin. My speech upon one of these occasions 
has been read for you. I won't distress you by reading any- 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 261 

tMng like the entire of it ; but allow me to read for you the 
concluding passage, because it turns on a topic I am now- 
discussing. 

[The honorable and learned gentleman read the passage alluded 
to.] 

Is that sectarianism ? Is that preferring the interests of a 
party or portion of the people to the nation at large ? Secta- 
rianism ! Why, gentlemen, you cannot but be aware that the 
cause of the Protestant dissenters of England was warmly 
advocated by me — that it was I drew up the petition in favor 
of the English Protestant Dissenters — that that petition was 
signed by twenty-eight thousand Catholics, passed at meetings 
of the association, and afterwards at the great aggregate 
meeting of Oathohcs, and that petition which I drew up was 
not upon the table of the House of Commons six weeks when 
the Protestant Dissenters of England were emancipated. I 
therefore treat with contempt and indignation the idea of 
sectarian difference ; and again, throughout the entire volumes 
that have been presented to you, has there been one word of 
a bigoted description found among them ? 

I have made more speeches than any other public man that 
ever existed — I have been more abused than any other man, 
but amidst all their calumnies they never flung upon me an 
accusation of bigotry against my fellow beings of any other 
persuasion. I have been calumniated in everything else — in 
that I have been spared, and why? because the folly and 
futihty of the calumny was so excessive that even my calum- 
niators spared me on that point. Sectarianism, therefore, is 
out of the question ; but what was our mode ? Legal and 
peaceable, and constitutional proceedings. I need not remind 
you again that I possess the confidence of the Irish people. 
I possessed it with a full repetition of my determination that 
all should be peaceable, with my full declaration that one sin- 
gle act of violence would detach me from the Eepeal agitation. 
But it has been said I made violent speeches. Has any vio- 
lence proceeded from me ? If I have made violent speeches 
would it not be fair to give me a recent and speedy opportu- 
nity of seeing how far the reports of those speeches were 



252 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

accurate, and what explanatory portions were applicable, and 
not reserve them for so remote a period. If violence is to be 
talked of, let us see this violence — it is an article from the 
Cheltenham Journal and Stroud Herald, August 2, 1841. 

" Wliat would, in reality, be justice to Ireland ? — What would be the 
greatest blessing that could be conferred on Ireland ? The answer to 
these questions is prompt, and comprised in a single word — conquest. 
Few are the nations, if any, that are the worse for having been conquered 
— and in the great majority of instances, as conquest implies superiority, 
the conquered have been gainers. The Bomans conquered, and where 
they conquered they also civihzed. 

"Now, Ireland, though under the dominion of England, has never 
been conquered by her. She may take tliis in the Ught of a compli- 
ment, or the reverse. To this day she is wild, savage, uncivilized, 
scarcely human. We speak of the mass of the people — of the aborigines 
of the island, of the Popish part of the population — of the wretched and 
ferocious slaves of O'Connell — of those who have never been brought 
under the gentle sway of the Protestant faith. 

" Had Ireland been actually conquered by England it would not have 
been thus. 

" The first step toward the conquest of Ireland would be to send over 
a commanding mihtary force, not to shed blood, biit to prevent the shed- 
ding of blood. 

"Every individual Popish priest should then be secured, and exiled 
for Ufe, nor be permitted to return under the penalty of death ; and all 
persons found aiding and abetting a Popish priest in secreting himself, 
should also be condemned to exile for life. 

" These men, the priests, &c., might be shipped for some of the colo- 
nies, and there receive allotments of land, and there be kept under strict 
surveillance. 

" Such is a simple outUne of the measures for the bloodless conquest 
of Ireland. 

"It is for a Conservative government alone to achieve this glojy. Let 
Sir Robert Peel and his colleagues look to it." 

It appears by those papers that we did not threaten any- 
thing, and it appears distinctly that every disclaimer, and repe- 
tition of disclaimer, to use anything but peaceable and legal 
means, was given over and over again. There was no violence 
of any kind ; none whatever had taken place. We are now 
charged with a newspaper conspiracy, because it is alleged 
that certain newspapers contained libels. Why, if they did, 
there is no person in the world more open to or capable of 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 253 

punisliment for an offence than a newspaper proprietor. He 
is perhaps more in the hands of the law than any other man 
in existence. There is the stamp office, which must know all 
about him, and the moment he offends they have nothing to do 
but call on him to account for his actions. The Attorney- 
General had this facihty if he wished, or if the libel law had 
been infringed. But there is one thing in the so-called news- 
paper conspiracy that cannot be got over. Take up the Na- 
tion, which was read for you — a great deal of prose, and a 
considerable quantity of poetry — ^love songs and all, and then 
take up the Pilot, which was also read for you — all prose and 
no poetry — take up any of these articles, and can you say that 
one of the journals copied the other ? Can they produce any 
one of these papers where the other copied an article from it ? 
No, they cannot ; and they could not charge them with con- 
spiracy unless they joined for that purpose. In place of con- 
spiracy they would find discord, not concord, between them. 
There was not a particle of combination among them. In 
fact, there was not only no combination among them, but a 
kind of rivalship and jealousy relative to these articles. Was 
that like combination or crime ? I will not go into that ques- 
tion at present, as it is so well ascertained. Well, gentlemen, 
one word about arbitration courts. I shall not trouble you 
with many observations on that head. One of the great ad- 
vantages of these courts, however, was the abohtion of un- 
necessary and superfluous oaths. There was no oath taken in 
these courts at all. Gentlemen, I do not know if it strikes you 
in the same light as it strikes me, on the subject of oaths ; but 
I think the estabhshing of such courts a great advantage in 
that respect. In the superior courts the oath was a different 
thing ; but I ask any Christian man if he would not wish to 
see unnecessary swearing abolished. 

I find by a parliamentary return in 1832 that there were one 
hundred and seventy-two thousand oaths taken in the excise 
department, and in another year one hundred and fifty-eight 
thousand in the excise also. This was an unnecessary profana- 
tion of the name of the Deity — one hundred and fifty-eight thou- 
sand oaths in one year, and one hundred and seventy-two thou- 
sand in another ! What an enormous quantity of unnecessary 



254: SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'COKNELL. 

oaths ! In the arbitration courts there was no oath whatever 
necessary. I shudder at the idea of so many oaths being taken 
in one year, and I had several conversations on the subject, 
and Lord Nugent did me the high honor to ask my assistance in 
bringing in a bill to abolish unnecessary oaths, and substitute 
a declaration in the stead. I consented, and we succeeded in 
passing a bill substituting declarations instead of oaths, and 
I hope I shall see the day when such wiU be extended even 
farther, for I abhor the taking of the sacred name of God in 
vain, and the man who would tell an untruth in a matter of 
property, would not set the least value on his oath, nor would 
he at all scruple swearing to what he knew to be false if he 
thought it ripe for his purpose. I hope, gentlemen, we will 
see the day when declarations like the Quakers, which are as 
binding on the conscience as the oath, will be substituted and 
used as an oath by all Christian men and in all Christian coun- 
tries. I am sure you will not ascribe conspiracy to that. 

Well, gentlemen, I now come to the means by which we were 
to achieve the Eepeal of the Legislative Union. The means 
are pacific, and I would not adopt any other means for the ac- 
complishment of that sacred object. It was said that the 
meetings were not commensurate with the objects in view, but 
the object was one that could not be ascertained if the entire 
Irish people had not called for the Repeal of that Union. A 
charge of that description should not be made when the Irish 
people demanded it. The words of Grattan were that the de- 
mand was made backed by the voice of the Irish. I re-echo 
that word, and the minister was bound to obey that caU. "We 
have made the experiment, and we find that the mind of the 
nation is in favor of a domestic legislature. We have made the 
experiment — we did not do so without the enunciation of the 
voice of the Irish people. We have that voice from one end 
of the country to the other. The voice has gone abroad, and 
it only remains for the Irish people to call for the restoration 
of their Irish parliament. When I brought the question be- 
fore the House of Commons, the members who supported it 
were few — only one Englishman, and not one Scotchman ; but 
what was the change since that time with respect to the 
measure ? And was it not idle and absurd in the last degree 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 255 

to say that anything was intended save the regeneration of 
the country by the most peaceable means? What has the 
Crown read for you as part of the conspu*acy? Why, the 
rules of the Association. 

[He proceeded to read the rules, which were already before the 
public] 

Mr. O'Connell then continued. This, gentlemen, is the plan 
of the Repeal Association. No alternative was held out by 
these rules but the fullest allegiance, the most perfect loyalty, 
and unquaUfied peace ; and in this way, and no other, was 
agitation to be conducted. Yet, under these circumstances 
we have the charge of combination made against us, which 
amounts to one of conspiracy. That document, gentlemen, is 
given in proof against us. Well, however, to carry their proof 
further, the Crown have read two other documents. The first 
is, " The Reconstruction of the House of Commons," and the 
second, " The Renewed Action of the Irish parliament." The 
first of these was signed upon the 14th of May, 1840, and the 
second upon the 22d of August, 1843. Now, my lords, this 
has been read against us as evidence of a conspiracy. And 
although it has been read before, I think it my duty to read 
it again. 

. Chief Justice. — What is the date of the document you are 
about reading from, Mr. O'Connell ? 

Mr. O'Connell.— The 14th of May, 1840, my lord. Mark, 
gentlemen, that after taking the scale of representation from 
the returns of the population of the different towns, it begins 
at page 7, thus : 

[Here the honorable and learned gentleman read the extract.] 

Mr. O'Connell then proceeded. Part of that document has 
been read by the Crown, and it distinctly states that by par- 
liamentary means, and by parhamentary means only, was Re- 
peal to be obtained. I shall call your attention by-and-by to 
a portion of that document. The next document was also 
read, and I am entitled to the full force of all it contains. 
The Crown has no right to select portions from it, and I am 
entitled to the benefit of the unobjectionable parts, for they 
had no right to suppress them. 



256 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

[lilr. O'Connell tlien read " The Eenewed Action of the Irish 
parHament."] 

There, my lords, is the evidence for the prosecution — there 
is the evidence to prove a conspiracy — there is the evidence to 
prove illegal means — there is the evidence to prove illegal 
objects. Gentlemen of the jury, I put it to you, it is not my 
evidence, 'tis not I produces it, 'tis not we who have called 
upon it in our defence ; though it does contain, I think, an 
admirable defence ; but it is brought before you on the part 
of the Crown, and produced by the Attorney-General ; that is 
the Attorney-General's evidence, and upon that evidence I 
call upon you to acquit us — you are bound to believe it ; there 
is the plan for Repeal, what fault do you find with it ? There 
is a theory introduced into it not called upon for practice, but 
I insist upon my right to discuss that theory. I may be 
wrong, but it is a great constitutional question which man is 
at liberty to discuss, and form his opinion upon. The opinion 
may be erroneous, but the right is undoubted, and I insist 
upon it that question ought to be considered in a way favor- 
able to the claims of Ireland. The competency of the Iiish 
parhament to pass the Act of Union was discussed long 
before the Union itself was talked of. 

One of the works by which the revolution of 1688 was con- 
sohdated, was a book written by Mr. Locke upon government. 
He wrote it for the purpose of sustaining the "Whigs of that 
day — the Williamite Whigs — to prove that James had no title 
to the throne, and that "William was the lawful monarch of 
England in consequence of what had happened. That book, 
gentlemen of the jury, was a class-book in Trinity College at 
the time the Union passed. It was a book out of which the 
young men were examined. Shortly after the Union it was 
foimd inconvenient to let it remain, and for some reason, I 
don't know the cause, but it was withdrawn. But at one time 
it was a book of authority, and requiring not any council to 
give it authority ; it was the great instrument by means of 
which the revolution of '88 was achieved, the principle of 
which revolution no man admires more than I do. In Locke's 
book on government, I find : 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 257 

" The legislators cannot transfer the power of making laws into 
other hands, for it being but a delegated power from the people, they 
who have it cannot pass it over to others. The people alone can 
appoint the form of the commonwealth, which is by constituting the 
legislature and appointing in whose hands that shall be ; and when the 
people will have said, "We submit, and will be governed by laws made 
by such men and in such terms, nobody else can say other men shall 
make laws for them. The power of the legislature being derived from 
the people by a positive voluntary grant and institution, can be no other 
than what the positive grant conveyed, which being only to make laws 
and not to make legislatures, the legislatm-e can have no power to transfer 
their authority of making laws, or to place it in other hands." 

No doctrine can be more distinct. No delegated legislature, 
elected for a time, had power or authority to transfer the rights 
of their constituents to anybody else. Upon this subject 
Lord Grey was Tery explicit. 

Lord Grey, then Mr. Charles Grey, said in the British 
House of Commons : 

"Though you should be able to cany the measure, yet the people of 
Ireland would wait for an opportunity of recovering their rights, which 
they will say were taken from them by force." 

But I have still more exphcit authority. Hear this passage 
from the speech of Mr. Saurin, spoken on the 15th of March, 
1800, read by me on the trial of John Magee, in his presence, 
and adopted with manhness by the Attorney General of the 
day: 

" Those great men had assisted in the revolution of 1688 — they had 
put down the slavish doctrines of passive obedience, they had declared 
that the King held his crown by compact with the people, and that when 
the Crown violated that compact, by subverting, or attempting to sub- 
vert, the constitution which was the guarantee and safeguard of that 
people's liberty, the crown was forfeited, and the nation had a right to 
transfer the sovereign power to other hands. They had no notion of the 
doctrines, which he was sorry to see now received — that the supreme 
power of the state was omnipotent, and that the people were bound to 
submit, whatever that power thought proper to inflict upon them. At 
that day such a monstrous proposition as this would not have been tol- 
erated, though now it began to raise its head and threaten the constitu- 
tion. But he for one would not admit it ; he would re-assert the doc- 
trine of the glorious revolution, and boldly declare in the face of that 
House, and of the nation, that when the sovereign power violated that com- 



258 SELECT SPEECHES OF DAKIEL O'CONNELL. 

pact, wliicli at its institution was declared to exist between the govern- 
ment and the people, that moment the right of resisting that power ac- 
crues. Whether it would be prudent in the people to avail themselves 
of that right would be another question ; but surely if there be this right 
in the nation to resist an unconstitutional assumption of power which 
threatened the public liberty, there could not occur a sti'onger case for 
the exercise of it than this measure would afford, if carried against the 
will of the majority of the nation. " 

Nothing can be more explicit than that constitutional doc- 
trine ; nothing can be more extensive than its operation. It 
was asserted by Saurin, quoting the highest authority of the 
heroes of the revolution of '88, so called, of the persons that 
carried that revolution, that by the Enghsh constitution the 
principle of passive obedience and non-resistance is totally 
fdreign to our constitution — the right to resist — rather a deli- 
cate question — commences when the contract is broken ; but 
the existence of a constitutional right of that description shows 
it. The revolution itself would be void if this doctrine were not 
true. He then goes on to say : 

"If a Legislative Union should be so forced upon this country against 
the will of its inhabitants, it would be a nullity, and resistance to it 
would be a struggle against usurpation and not a resistance against law. " 

That was alleged, too, with reference to a period after the 
Union was carried ; that is, looking to its ha^dng all the sanc- 
tion of form, the great seal of England on the one hand, the 
great seal of Ireland on the other, and the consent of the 
Crown given to it ; yet Mr. Saurin, talking constitutional doc- 
trine, declared it to be a nullity, and resistance to it a matter 
of prudence. And in a second speech of his, which was pub- 
lished in the shape of a pamphlet : 

"You may make the Union binding as a law, but you cannot make it 
obligatory on conscience. It will be obeyed so long as England is strong, 
but resistance to it will be in the abstract a duty, and the exhibition of 
that resistance will be a mere question of prudence. 

I will be bound by it, says he, as a law, and so say I, but it 
wiU be void in conscience and constitutional principle. It wiU 
be obeyed as a law, but it will be the duty of the people to 
exhibit that resistance to it when it is prudent to do so. He 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 259 

did not mean by that resistance, force, or violence — ^he meant 
legal and peaceable means — but by means adequate to tlie 
purpose while they keep within the precincts of the law. 
There is another authority — Lord Plunkett. He says : 

' ' Sir, I, in the most express terms, deny the competency of parliament 
to do this act. I warn you, do not dare to lay your hands on the con- 
stitution. I tell you, that if, circumstanced as you are, you pass this 
act, it will be a mere nuUity, and no man in Ireland wUl be bound to 
obey it. I make the assertion deliberately. I repeat it. I call on any 
man who hears me to take down my words. You have not been elected 
for this purpose. You are appointed to make laws, and not legislatures 
^you are appointed to exercise the function of legislators, and not to 
transfer them — you are appointed to act under the constitution, and not 
to alter it ; and if you do so, your act is a dissolution of the government 
— you resolve society into its original elements, and no man in the land 
is bouiid to obey you. Sir, I state doctrines that are not merely founded 
on the immutable laws of truth and reason ; I state not merely the 
opinion of the ablest and wisest men who have written on the science of 
government ; but I state tlie practice of our constitution as settled at the 
era of the revolution ; and I state the doctrine under which the House 
of Hanover derives its title to the throne. Has the King a right to 
transfer his Grown ? Is he competent to annex it to the Crown of Spain, 
or any other country ? No ; but he may abdicate it, and every man who 
knows the constitution, knows the consequence — the right reverts to tho 
next in succession. If they all abdicate, it reverts to the people. The 
man who questions this doctrine, in the same breath must ai'raign the 
sovereign on the throne as a usurper. Are you competent to transfer 
your legislative rights to the French Council of Five Hundred ? Are 
you competent to transfer them to the British parliament ? I answer — 
No ! If you transfer, you abdicate ; and the great original trust reverts 
to the people from whom it issued. Yourselves you may extinguish, but 
parliament you cannot extinguish. It is enthroned in the hearts of the 
people — ^it is enshrined in the sanctuary of the constitution — it is as im- 
mortal as the island which it protects. As well might the frantic suicide 
hope that the act which destroyed his miserable body should extinguish 
his eternal soul ! Again I therefore warn you. Do not dare to lay your 
hands on the constitution — ^it is above your powers." 

Oh, it is a beautiful passage — " As well might the frantic 
suicide hope that the act which destroys his miserable body 
should extinguish his eternal soul ! Again I therefore warn 
you. Do not dare to lay your hands on the constitution — it is 
above your powers." I insist on the truth of that constitu- 



260 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

tional law. I take the qualification as laid down by Saurin— 
it is binding as a law while it continues to have the form and 
shape and pressure of law, but it does not bind on conscience 
or principle. Though it had been said to me : Why, this 
would make all the acts which were passed since the Union 
void. I deny it, it would do no such thing. I say they are 
voidable, but not void. It has been said, you would, by that 
repeal even the Emancipation Act. If I could get the repeal 
of the Union, I would make you a present of Emancipation. 
Where do I find the principle of its being voidable, not void ? 
I find it in the language of Saurin. I may be wrong in this 
position, but I cannot be wrong to argue from it. It may be 
said that this act is to be obeyed, and it is to be considered 
as law. 

Gentlemen of the jury, the point was raised abeady in J. 782, 
when the Irish parliament declared that no power on earth 
could bind the Irish people but the King, lords, and commons 
of Ireland ; and there was an act passed to that effect, the 
consequence of which was to do away with the authority of 
all laws passed in England, and which were binding on Ire- 
land, though they regulated the property of Ireland ; but 
Chief Baron Yelverton stepped in, and by his act, declared all 
laws passed in England to be binding in Ireland, and that 
they should continue to be so. But it may be said this is in- 
consistent with our allegiance — I deny it ; for this authority 
exists in the Queen, which can only be exercised through her 
responsible minister. It is no derogation of her power — it is 
rather an increase of that power. And shaU I be to^d this of 
a country which has made so many irregular successions? 
Richard the Second was dethroned by parhament— so was 
Eichard the Third, and Henry the Seventh set u^. Then 
also the royal succession was altered in the reign of Henry the 
Eighth, and settling nothing, there was another alteration at 
the time of the revolution in 1688 — so that there could not be 
anything illegal in discussing this question. Surely not. 
There may be a mistake — there may be an error, but there 
cannot be crime to discuss the matter publicly, undesignedly, 
and with the sustentation of the authorities I have addressed. 
You have Saurin, and Plunkett — you have Locke, you have 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 261 

Lord Grey giving his opinion in favor of it. I draw to a 
close. 

I come back to the evils of the Union, and I would look to 
every honest man to exert himself for its repeal. Would it not 
cure the odious evils of absenteeism ? It was calculated by 
an able man that nine million pounds a year, pass out of this 
country ; the railway commissioners reduce it to six millions. 
Take the reduced amount, and I ask, did ever a country suffer 
such an odious drain of six million pounds of absentee money ? 
Six miUion pounds] raised every year in this country, not to 
fructify it — not to employ the people of the country, not to 
take care of the sick and poor or destitute — ^but six miUions 
are transplanted to foreign lands — sent there but giving no re- 
turns — leaving poverty to those who enriched. Take six mil- 
lions for the last ten years. Look now at sixty millions drawn 
from this unhappy country. Take it for the next six years — 
can you in conscience encourage this ? There is a cant that 
agitation prevents the influx of capital. "What is the meaning 
of that ? We do not want English capital ; leave us our own 
six millions, and we shall have capital in abundance. We do 
not want that left-hand benevolence which would drain the 
country with one hand, and let in niggardly with the other. 
There is another item which exhausts the resources of this 
country, and that to the amount of nearly X2,000,000 annually ; 
in the last year itVas so low as X700,000, but whether the one 
or the other, it is drawn out of the country never to return. 
There is again the Woods and Forests. That department re- 
ceives £74,000 a year out of L-eland in quit rents, etc. How 
was that expended for the last ten years? Between the 
Thames Tunnel, and to ornament Trafalgar Square. We 
want an additional bridge in Dublin. Why have we not the 
X74,000 for that purpose ? Have we not as good a right as 
that it should be expended on Trafalgar Square ? If we had 
the parHament in College Green, would that X74,000 be sent 
to adorn a square in London? Have we not sites and 
squares enough in Dublin for the purpose of public utility ? 

There are other evils atteudiag this contiaued drain on the 
country. I remember there having been quoted in parliament 
the work of Mr. Young, a poUtical economist, who journeyed 



262 SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL O'CONNELL. 

in Ireland in '78, wlio, in speaking of tlie increase of popula- 
tion, lie accounted for it by the never-failing bellyful of pota- 
toes — they had all a bellyful of potatoes, and to that he at- 
tributed the increase. But is that the case now ? Has not 
the country sensibly declined ? is not even one meal of pota- 
toes a treat and a treasure ? 

According to the evidence of the commissioners of Poor-law 
inquuy the people are now in rags. Was this my language ? 
No, gentlemen. I appeal to yourselves — are they not reduced 
to misery and wretchedness, frittered away by periodical fam- 
ine ? — and there were sis or eight since the Union. There was 
rehef from England, while provisions were in quantities trans- 
ported from this country ; provisions were in the country while 
the people were perisliing with hunger ; and those provisions 
were exported from the country. But the Poor-law Commis- 
sioners report the following frightful picture. But first let me 
tell you that the Population Commissioner's report shows the 
aggravation of the evil. The gentleman who made that report 
is a miUtary officer — Captain Larcom — a man of science, of 
integrity, and of honor. He reports the state of the popula- 
tion to be this, that 30 per cent, of the town and city popula- 
tion were in abject poverty, and that 70 per cent, of the 
agricultural were in q,bject poverty. These are not my words, 
they are the words of Captain Larcom. Where, then, is the 
advantage of the Union, which has thus increased poverty, 
bringing pestilence, and involving our poor in misery and 
filth? Gentlemen, why should we not adopt any plan by 
which we would escape from these horrors. To be sure, the 
Poor-law Commissioners go more into details. Mind you, gen- 
tlemen, this is evidence made on oath before the Poor-law 
Commissioners. Allow me to read some of it to you. 

" One family had but one meal for the space of three days — another 
subsisted on a quart of meal a day ; another Uved on a little boiled 
cabbages without anything to mix with them," 

Gentlemen, I will not harass your feelings by reading any 
more ; the book is full of them ; and are two milhons three 
hundred thousand of your fellow-countrymen to live in a state 
of positive destitution, and nothing to be done for them ? Is 
no effort to be made ? Permit me to call your attention to a 



SPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE. 263 

few passages of a report of a meeting held last Monday week, 
in reference to the sick and indigent of your city. [Mr. 
O'Connell then read an extract from Saunders, detaiHng the 
misery which pervaded the city.] Can any language of mine 
describe the misery which exists, more fully ? 

Another hideous feature of Captain Larcom's report is, that 
the population is diminishing by 70,000 in ten years. It is 
increased from the period of 1821 to 1831 , and from that to 
1841 the population has diminished by the number of 70,000, 
who would have been all reared up if they had anything to 
support them ; and are we to be hunted down, who are the 
friends of the poor ? Are we, who wish to have industry re- 
warded — are we, I ask it on every principle of sense and jus- 
tice — are we to be prosecuted and persecuted for seeking the 
means of reheving this distress ? We have the means of relief 
in our power ; we Hve in the most fertile country in the world, 
no country is in possession of such harbors, the earliest his- 
torical mention of which is made by Tacitus, admitting that 
our harbors were the best, and that consequently they were 
more crowded. The country is intersected with noble estua- 
ries. Ships of five hundred tons burden ride into the heart of 
the country, safe from every wind that blows. No country pos- 
sesses such advantages for commerce ; the machinery of the 
world might be turned by the water-power of Ireland. Take 
the map, and dissect it, and you will find that a good harbor 
is not more remote from any spot in Ireland than thirty miles. 
Why is not the country prosperous ? Did I not read for you 
of the unheard-of magical prosperity that followed her legis- 
lative independence? Did I not read extracts from the writ- 
ings and speeches of men most adverse to Ireland — of men 
most anxious to conceal her greatness, as evidence of her 
increasing prosperity under her parliament ? What happened 
once, wiU surely happen again. ' 

Oh, gentlemen, I struggle to rescue the poor from poverty, 
and to give wages and employment to those now idle — to keep 
our g, ntry at home by an absentee tax after the example of 
the government of last year, if by no other means, and com- 
pel them to do their duty to their coimtry. I leave the case 
to you — I deny that there is anything in it to stain me with 



264: SELECT SPEECHES OF DANIEL o'CONNELL. 

conspiracy. I reject witli contempt the appellation. I have 
acted in the open clay in the presence of the government ; in 
the presence of the magistrates ; nothing was secret, private, 
or concealed ; there was nothing but what was exposed 
to the universal world, I have struggled for the restoration 
of the parhament to my native country. Others have succeed- 
ed in their endeavors, and some have failed ; but, succeed or 
fail, it is a glorious struggle. It is a struggle to make the 
first land on earth possess that bounty and benefit which God 
and nature intended. 



<-^ o 




vOo, 




ci-^ '- 




•^ o - I ■* ,G 



* 8 I A 



'^.^^ 



















<, 



<:) 



•'^v - 






^?v:^ 






•>'^ ,^X 



«l?rrR5§5C*^' 



%>./ 






nO°<, 



•^o 0^' 



■^A 






\^ 



^^%, 






,0' 



■>'^rs\ 



"-^A V^ 



.-^^ 



■^-^^l 



\^\-'ll''^ 

S^ .^r"^ 



,v 



.oq. 



V 



.0^. 



■^ 



\^ 



O- ,-0' ^'-^.^w, ^^ "^^ 






•"c.0^ 



:^'^, V 



^-.,^" 






^f 



\\ 



• \ 




-v\ 






v' 






